"Because I Want So Much " - Alternative View

Table of contents:

"Because I Want So Much " - Alternative View
"Because I Want So Much " - Alternative View

Video: "Because I Want So Much " - Alternative View

Video: "Because I Want So Much " - Alternative View
Video: °~ PLAYLIST - Dimitrescu Family - Lady Dimitrescu And Her Daughters Want To Be Together ~° 2024, March
Anonim

I don’t remember how many decades ago I noticed an interesting feature in justifying my position or my choice among different people. If you constantly ask a person "Why?" for each explanation, then in the end in almost all cases the ending will be one or another variation of the phrase in the title. Let's consider this feature in more detail. Only before I warn the reader that I have not grasped this topic to such an extent as to draw deep conclusions, I myself have not yet been able to answer the questions that arise on the topic, but I have been thinking about it for some time. All the reasoning here is just a disordered preliminary outline for a more detailed study later. I hope they will still help someone in such a messy way.

To begin with, I will give you all those variations of the rationale "Because I want it so …" that I can remember in 10 minutes. I emphasize, ALL of the phrases below mean EXACTLY THE SAME AND THE SAME according to their original motive.

1 I like it when done like this.

2 This is my upbringing and this is due to the fact that I did (do).

3 This is my way of life, and it dictates my choice.

4 I am so used to it and so let it be so.

5 I find it difficult to do otherwise.

6 I cannot do otherwise.

7 Circumstances compel me to do so.

8 I see no reason to do it differently.

9 This is the culture of the circle of people in which I hang out.

10 I have never liked the Russian language, and therefore I make mistakes in letters, and I will.

11 I have never been friends with mathematics (with any other subject), and therefore it turned out that way.

12 Are you my mom to tell me the right way?

13 Are you the smartest here to give me advice?

14 I like beer (vodka, sweets, pies), and therefore I will consume it (them).

15 I believe my doctor, and he advised me to drink a little wine.

16 My idol says that red wine is good, but he himself is strong and healthy, so I drink wine.

17 I play computer games because they develop my intellect, reaction, teach me to look for non-standard approaches to the problem. Well, they make gray life better.

18 I do not follow the Zero Waste strategy because it is useless (most of them will not follow it anyway), and it’s just difficult for me, I’m not comfortable and I will not refuse many pleasant things in harmful packages. And in general, not everyone is obliged to do as you do.

19 I am building a house outside the city because I want to live cleaner and more freely.

20 I blog because I think my thoughts are helpful to people.

21 I do this because Vasya wants it.

22 Because the great Lenin bequeathed so.

Let's stop the list here. What can you see? Each “justification” of your action or choice consists of two parts, which can be expressed by a simple formula: “I do A because B,” while B is always tied to himself, to his “want”, even if not directly, then indirectly. And in the last two paragraphs, in which someone else's desire seems to be traced, and not our own, we see in the omissions a reference to ourselves: “I obey Vasya, because I want to, and although I don’t like to do what he needs, I still do, because resistance is useless here, he forces me, and I want to live, so I have to obey "," I follow the precepts of Ilyich, because this is how I was brought up and trained, and when I was taught and brought up, they forgot to teach me to think freely and independently, leaving in the bondage of a narrow education,which I call complete or even supreme. Knowing this, I still want to stay that way."

The primary reliance on one's “I” is a manifestation of self-centrism, but the consequences of such behavior can be clearly seen in the example of our civilization. There is even an anecdote on this topic that reveals one of the facets of what I had in mind in this paragraph.

Yes, of course, I also laughed at the oddity of the alien in terms of his belief in the importance of such a "list", as if the formal record or its absence had some meaning, but still in such humor you can see another meaning: a concentrated expression of some problem in unnaturally exaggerated forms, which becomes understandable to many people after such exaggerations.

How could it be otherwise?

Promotional video:

This is a logical question, because an attentive reader may say: “Even if you think that you need to rely on God and keep counting from Him, then it still comes down to the logic“I want it this way”, because you want to rely on God and do everything the way it should be done in line with His Providence, because you personally want it. Yes guys, unfortunately this approach is also a variant of self-centrism. And the true God-centered behavior looks different.

"Stop, now this fool will tell us the truth, I don't believe it, he cannot know it!" - I hear above the right ear …

Wait, comrades, firstly, a little less than half of the above "excuses" I took from my life, thereby emphasizing that I myself follow the strategy "because I want it so …", and secondly, I tried to understand this problem and just want to share my thoughts. I have an idea which approach would be significantly less self-centered. Here he is.

A less self-centered approach would be one in which a person refuses to realize his “I” apart from other people, and seeks to realize his unity with EVERY person on Earth. Yes, yes, and with a drunken poor fellow in a puddle, and with a blunt major from the "elite", and with the most hated enemy, and with the best friend. You need to understand that all of you are in the same conditions and, on the whole, do not differ much from each other. Of course, I'm NOT talking about formal (coming from the form) living conditions and differences. I mean, your lives are almost the same in substance. I am convinced that all people on this planet as a whole have, if not the same, then still a similar set of vices and other nonsense, and one of the meanings of life on Earth is to get rid of such shortcomings.

Here I will immediately make a reservation: the above phrase is an excellent test for self-centrism - if it caused you resentment, irritation, anger, or maybe gloating disagreement, then the test has failed. This means that you do not understand the meaning of the phrase laid down by me. Well, and, accordingly, you should not waste time on this yet, it is better to go and satisfy your self-centrism, so that it “kicks” as much as possible, and from the position of the experience gained, go back and reread. Time does not matter, and the number of repetitions, as usual, is infinite: until it comes.

How to use it? I will describe six points of my reflections that I recommend paying attention to. Based on this, everyone can build a methodology suitable for him personally, at least partial departure from self-centrism.

The first

We must try to understand the unity of humanity in the continuity of generations, to look at humanity as a single system. To begin with, you can try to imagine all people as one single organism, this will help to understand all the dullness of your ideas based on the illusion of a separate "I". Just imagine that every cell of your body will begin to pursue only its own interests. There will be not a body, but one solid cancerous tumor that will devour itself. In a sense, cancer, which has intensified in our time, is the physical embodiment of the mental plane that prevails in society. The cancer cell is self-centered and works for itself, while the rest work for the whole body, that is, in the mainstream of the encompassing providence … similarly, a person should work in line with the Providence of God, and not for himself-beloved. A disease such as cancer can be a good example of the projection of the self-centrism of civilization onto the bodies of the individuals living in it.

Second

You need to dig in your head all the explanations that end with "I want it so much" and try to refuse them, leaving your actions and your choice unreasonable. That is, consider that "I want it this way" is the same as the lack of justification (in fact, it is). Try to replace unfounded decisions with justified ones, that is, those that are justified by expediency from the standpoint of the encompassing system. In your case, it will be the Providence of God, not lower. You understand that you can justify anything from the position, for example, the question of the survival of your family, or maybe the sect in which you hang out, from the position of the state, from the position of life on Earth. These are all little things. Each person SHOULD HAVE an inner sense of God and His Providence. Here you need to focus on it. By the way, this is VERY difficult to do,because the tendency to confirm comes into force when a person will consider the correct arguments or even "signs from above" those that confirm his initial position, dictated by the strategy "I want it so".

Example: a mother aggressively instructs her son on how to properly raise her son, referring to her experience, age, and supposedly care for the family and the future of the child. In the best case, it can turn out like in the film "Gifted (2017)", but in real life the situation is much more tragic, I observed this especially strongly during exams at the university, when about a third of students complained that their parents were forced to enter one or another faculty. and therefore they do not want to study, they only need a "blue crust". So they explained to me their request to give at least a "C" for nothing.

Let's go back to the example with the mother: in the example of such a woman, we see the typical self-centrist who wants everything to be according to her will and does not want to bother with the consequences of possible mistakes of his son in raising his grandson. Moreover, by her despotism, she intends to deprive her son of the opportunity to gain a full-fledged experience of upbringing, knowing full well that one can help without interfering, but still prevents her son and grandson from becoming full-fledged people. She does not need this, because for her they are just a tool for satisfying self-centered values, although all this is beautifully decorated with family ties, conversations about care and love. Her goal is not to help, but to satisfy some of her personal interests, running straight into her own “I want”. At the same time, the protective mechanisms of the psyche do NOT give it the opportunity to realize this. Usually,such a mother understands that she raised her son badly and this is an additional reason not to trust him with raising a grandson, because “this fool can’t really do anything,” which means it’s better to raise a grandson herself … knowing in advance that the same will happen. Almost every reader, UNDEFINITELY, could see behind this example his own situations in life, in which someone aggressively did one thing towards him, but covered it up with supposedly good intentions. Tell me, reader, did you manage to convince this person and bring him to clean water? Most likely not, this person remained unconvinced, even if he capitulated in a direct logical dispute. SO WHY DO YOU THINK that you can pull the same logic out of YOURSELF and defeat it? Do not even hope you will not be able to do it without special training. But there is a way out.that she raised her son badly and this is an additional reason not to trust him with raising a grandson, because “this fool can’t really do anything,” which means that it’s better to raise a grandson herself … knowing in advance that the same will happen. Almost every reader, UNDEFINITELY, could see behind this example his own situations in life, in which someone aggressively did one thing towards him, but covered it up with supposedly good intentions. Tell me, reader, did you manage to convince this person and bring him to clean water? Most likely not, this person remained unconvinced, even if he capitulated in a direct logical dispute. SO WHY DO YOU THINK that you can pull the same logic out of YOURSELF and defeat it? Do not even hope you will not be able to do it without special training. But there is a way out.that she raised her son badly and this is an additional reason not to trust him in raising a grandson, because “this fool can’t really do anything,” which means that it’s better to raise a grandson herself … knowing in advance that the same will happen. Almost every reader, UNDEFINEDLY, could see behind this example his own situations in life, in which someone aggressively did one thing towards him, but covered it up with supposedly good intentions. Tell me, reader, did you manage to convince this person and bring him to clean water? Most likely not, this person remained unconvinced, even if he capitulated in a direct logical dispute. SO WHY DO YOU THINK that you can pull the same logic out of YOURSELF and defeat it? Do not even hope you will not be able to do it without special training. But there is a way out.

The example above is provided so that the reader will understand how difficult it will be for him to force himself to be honest with himself and get rid of the bias towards confirmation. Imagine yourself in the place of this poor woman, to whom they are trying to explain her stupidity. Now multiply your desire to protect your self-centrism by a thousand - so you get about one percent of the zeal and the effort with which you will protect yourself-loved one from exposure. Although, probably, I turned down about one percent, there won't be even a hundredth of a percent. But, as I said, there is a way out - for me personally, it is expressed in a simple algorithm that needs to be repeated many, many hundreds of times. It is described at the end of the article. The algorithm is not a panacea, but there is something in it.

Third

We will have to forget about the vicious logic, which is built around such reasoning like: "why should I?..", or "why don't you punish him …", or "why he can, but I can't …", or "I'm in differences from you … "and on all variants of opposing your qualities with strangers or, GOD'S forbid, the qualities of your idol and less pleasant person for you. Of course, there is no need to extend this advice to the outward manifestations of some motives, for example, there is nothing wrong with paying attention to the difference in the color of clothes: "Here you have a white shirt, but I have a blue one." Everything is fine here. I mean logic like this: "Unlike you, I would not steal, having seized power." You don't know yourself well. The next test from life will clearly make you understandthat you are as stupid as the person condemned by you in this phrase and WILL use some of your privileges for some purely personal goals, it will just look a little different in form, but absolutely also in content. Don't believe me? It's easy to check: go condemn someone for a motive that is not peculiar to you (as it seems to you), be sure to emphasize that YOU, unlike HIM, are not so feeble-minded and would never allow what this person did. Then carefully monitor the circumstances in which you find yourself. Very soon a situation will arise in which you will be guided by the same motive that you condemned. How to understand this? You will do something that is not entirely correct (this is always understandable from the consequences), but you will begin to make excuses, rationalize the action and get out in every possible way,maybe you will even again compare your act with the one you condemned in order to try to find as many external differences as possible. From now on, know that you have done the SAME. Example? Easy!

You have condemned an alcoholic for his temptation to drink. In the near future, you will do one of the following things related to the satisfaction of the SAME temptation in essence: watch a stupid TV series, play a useless computer game, eat harmful and tasty food, write an angry smug comment to some fool on the forum, use a female (male) body without conception goals, wave "ksiva" to avoid fair punishment for traffic violations (if you have such power), etc. At the same time, it will seem to you that there is some difference here: the difference between you and an alcoholic in a puddle that has its temptation. I agree that the FORM is different, but the content is one thing - submission to temptation! Or maybe you have condemned a personwho "cut" your car on the road? Soon you will find yourself in such an awkward position and with such a hindrance to other drivers that they will have every right to compare you with the cattle on the road whom you just condemned, judging by the form of your actions. But this is how you will be judged - just as you are judging, and you do it exactly BY FORM, not trying to stand in the person's place and UNDERSTAND his motive as if you were faced with the same problem. And now, life will give you THIS problem in the near future. “For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with what measure you mete, it will be measured to you also”(Matt. 7: 2).and you do it exactly BY FORM, without trying to stand in the person's place and UNDERSTAND his motive as if you were faced with the same problem. And now, life will give you THIS problem in the near future. “For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with what measure you mete, it will be measured to you also”(Matt. 7: 2).and you do it exactly BY FORM, without trying to stand in the person's place and UNDERSTAND his motive as if you were faced with the same problem. And now, life will give you THIS problem in the near future. “For with what judgment you judge, you will be judged; and with what measure you mete, it will be measured to you also”(Matt. 7: 2).

In other words, learn to take the person's place and understand his motivation as your own, and the highest skill here will look for him for justification instead of condemnation, while the highest power over the condemned person is FORGIVENESS. Let some troll say: "Well, don't resist when they beat you on the street, give the bandits whatever they want." Ladies! I will beat them properly (this is what they want) in moderation, if I can, but without anger and hatred, but with an understanding of their motives and compassion for their future fate. Moreover, I will render any help in life to any of them if it corresponds to the Providence of God in the form as I understand Him. You see, here you need to give the whole situation to the discretion of God: will be destined to be beaten, beaten in any case, will be destined to win - victory will be in any case, BUT ONLY on condition of complete trust in Him. And when, for example, anger, fear or other base thoughts take possession of you, then you are already in the hands of the devil and you will lose in any case: either you will be beaten, or then accused of exceeding the limits of necessary defense, even if you are a dead bespectacled man, and there were three. Here you need not protect your “I” (yourself, your honor, pride, your ideas, thoughts, projects, emotions, body), but the Providence of God from those who, in your opinion, are trying to trample on Him. And from above it will tell you in the language of circumstances, whether you are doing everything right or not quite. Therefore, the troll with his questions goes to rest in the forest, where it is clean and calm. There, and thoughts are formed in a different way.even if you are a dead bespectacled man, and there were three of them. Here you need not protect your “I” (yourself, your honor, pride, your ideas, thoughts, projects, emotions, body), but the Providence of God from those who, in your opinion, are trying to trample on Him. And from above it will tell you in the language of circumstances, whether you are doing everything right or not quite. Therefore, the troll with his questions goes to rest in the forest, where it is clean and calm. There, and thoughts are formed in a different way.even if you are a dead bespectacled man, and there were three of them. Here you need not protect your “I” (yourself, your honor, pride, your ideas, thoughts, projects, emotions, body), but the Providence of God from those who, in your opinion, are trying to trample on Him. And from above it will tell you in the language of circumstances, whether you are doing everything right or not quite. Therefore, the troll with his questions goes to rest in the forest, where it is clean and calm. There, and thoughts are formed in a different way.

Fourth

We'll have to forget about artificial vertical hierarchies, in which people divide themselves into groups on the basis of “above / below”. For example, on reasonable and unreasonable, implying that the reasonable are "better" than the unreasonable and somehow significantly differ from them for the better, although in reality the status of the rational is only a variant of self-proclamation, because both groups do exactly the same things, and not only in content, but often in form. The same is true in any classifications that imply division: into smart and stupid, into elite and cattle, into those who have power and subordinates, into wolves and sheep, etc. All Masonic initiations and degrees, religious hierarchies and other games are also included there. … Any such hierarchies are essentially a fake display of their own ideas about their meaning in this world,drawn by the imagination of a superficially thinking person, while real meaning is determined by real deeds and their motives, as well as ideals and life mission, which do not depend on the presence of a formal status in an artificial hierarchy. Vertical hierarchies can only be natural, and such are already laid down in nature by God Himself, you just need to learn to use them.

Fifth

We'll have to learn to assess NOT the form, but the content of other people's actions. The fact is that one and the same form of manifestation of reality can be a consequence of VERY DIFFERENT reasons and initial motives of those who carried out these manifestations. So, for example, if a person runs away from the attacker, then the reason may be: fear, unwillingness to accidentally kill the attacker, the desire to first understand the situation, tactical retreat due to the fact that his friends run up to the attacker from afar and now need to somehow maneuver. Outwardly, it looks ABSOLUTELY the same, believe me, but because someone who has studied the video from the surveillance camera can confidently and smugly say: "Hmm … what a coward, I would have killed this attacking sucker with my left, but he runs away for some reason." … Let's not talkthat such an observer will soon have the opportunity to test his theory (and he will probably fail it), you already know that.

Another example from real life: you accidentally found yourself in the struggle "for the female", when she found another boyfriend, against whom "she" does not mind, making it clear to both rivals through looks, movements, facial expressions and various hints. You can surrender and recognize the right of your opponent to "her", or you can thank fate for giving you the opportunity to be convinced of the true qualities of the "chosen one" who almost surrendered to you, revealing all of "her" animal essence in time. Both options look the same, again, you can believe me, but the only motive for rejecting the “female” in the first case is unwillingness to fight a stronger rival and cowardice, and the motive in the second case is victory over your instincts and complete victory over a rival with a noble giving up the need to somehow finish him off,that is, in fact, this is the highest power over your instincts and two other participants in the situation. Because the poor fellow-rival doomed himself to monstrous torments according to the principle "if the bride leaves for another, then no one knows who is lucky." We just sympathize with the rival and go to meet a real girl; a little later, you will see your opponent squeezed like a lemon, and his endlessly melancholy eyes will seem like extinguished lights of some great hope in the past. Well, what did you want? …and his endlessly melancholy eyes will seem like extinguished lights of some great hope in the past. Well, what did you want? …and his endlessly melancholy eyes will seem like extinguished lights of some great hope in the past. Well, what did you want? …

In more difficult situations, it may turn out that you just dreamed, but in reality the person did not do what you "saw" at all. Once I was walking past a line of people on the street and suddenly someone threw a huge lump of snow into the line and hit a man standing there. There were no people next to me, and someone threw a lump from afar, from a crowd of people far from the scene. But those standing in line pounced on me, because I was alone next to them. So, people thought that I was guilty, although I was just walking by. The logic was extremely simple and deadly: "WHO else could have done this, Ah !?". However, there is also a second point: I should NOT have condemned people for their carelessness, but should have taken their place and realized their motives. However, no, for some reason I decided to explain my innocence a little more roughly. There were more than enough situations like this in my life.

Observing a person's behavior, try to look at his MOTIVE, at the REASONS that prompted him to do so, and approach them critically, and not at the form of their manifestation. The form can be mistaken to the point that you simply imagined a non-existent form. But what if you don't understand a person well enough to see his motives? The same as usual: try to find out, understand, ask, ask, talk, etc. It happens, of course, that a conversation can start only after a fight, if the opponent has something completely boiled over, but you know … best friends understand each other in any situation. Bandage each other's wounds and talk.

If you cannot figure it out, then your superficial criticism will only do harm. And first of all, for you. Therefore, it is better to be silent and think, and not start arguing ahead of time.

Sixth

You should forget about ANY attempts to transfer your motivation to other people. Quite often you can find a situation in which a person draws conclusions about another person on the basis of OWN motives. At the same time, an interesting tendency is observed: when it comes to positive motives and qualities, then a person often considers himself to be their unique carrier, flirtatiously regretting that other people have not yet developed these qualities or are poorly developed, and when about negative ones, he will certainly be detect in other people, and in a clearly exaggerated form. Similar stories are found in many detective stories and other fictional works with a twisted plot. Remember yourself: you first suspect one person, then another, and then everything turns out to be completely unexpected. In life, everything can be more complicated:By attributing a negative motive or negative quality to a person, you can make an erroneous conclusion and an irreversible action based on it … and life is not a movie, you cannot rewind. And the word "can" is even inappropriate here, I would say "do it exactly." It is very easy to make a mistake, because the outward manifestation of two different motives can be the same. I have already given somewhere an example of how a seller might want to sell you an expensive and good product, guided by concern for your future. You can mistakenly perceive this as an attempt to sell more expensive, because both a good trader and a huckster look and convince outwardly the same. The payback for a mistake will be expected: after you throw away a bad broken thing, you still go and buy a good one that will not break … but you will still consider the seller a huckster,because he could not convince you to do it right at once. But why? Yes, because in this case, the huckster is here - you, and your logic of life is based on saving in installments. And since you are a huckster, then another person will ascribe a desire to cash in on you, because that is what you would have done in his place. Of course, you will pay the fine for such behavior by working off all sorts of unpleasant situations, the reasons for which you will not know, if you do not think about your behavior. You will pay the fine for such behavior by working off all sorts of unpleasant situations, the reasons for which you will never know if you do not think about your behavior. You will pay the fine for such behavior by working off all sorts of unpleasant situations, the reasons for which you will never know if you do not think about your behavior.

And then what?

I suppose that if a person tries to take these six observations into account in his daily life, then it will be easier for him to find justifications for his actions that are not reducible to “I want it this way”, because he will cease to distinguish his “I” from other people. It will be easier for him to give up the desired in favor of the right. Gradually, there will be an understanding sufficient to independently move away from the vicious self-centered behavior model.

Now I will briefly sketch the algorithm of actions proposed above between the lines in an explicit form.

1 Do not consider all your justifications, which logically boil down to “I want so”, as justification, and do not consider actions and choices based on them justified.

2 Try to move away from self-centered behavior as often as possible, reflecting on the six suggested observations each time you are about to make a choice or make some important decision.

3 Before you commit an important act in life, try to justify it correctly so that this act would be in line with God's Providence, and not in line with your self-centrism. This can be done because God answers any questions you ask him in prayer. This is another question, will you take the events that follow the prayer as answers, or will you continue to please your self-centrism, coming up with all sorts of excuses.

4 Every time you fail point 3 (and this WILL happen, moreover, OFTEN), try not to forget about the situation, but to analyze it retrospectively, that is, after the fact of its occurrence: why did this happen? where is the mistake? how to avoid it in the future? can you still get some benefit from the situation? how to fix / make amends for the error now? etc.

This concludes my preliminary reflections on this topic, if I can understand more deeply, I will let you know in another article.

Recommended: