I agree on some of the thing highlighted in the article related to people´s abuse in certain situations, but changing the scenario and the play won´t change the character´s problem. I do believe human nature has a flaw and that is reflected in various actions, thoughts, deviations and twisted thinking. But I cannot exclude myself nor others from this reality, I do want to think of a better world where "they" don´t rule over "us" but that too is part of all of us, we have controlling tendencies, to a smaller or larger scale, towards one and other. Just by the fact that "we" think different from "them" mean there is a difference of thinking, a division, there will always be a difference of thinking, that makes us unique, but at the same time that makes things very complicated if there is no order. We talk about the ideal world, but what to do if we all have a different idea of where this world has to advance to? We don´t want and can´t contradict others(we respect them and try to love them) but obviously there is no unity of thinking, we will finish by breaking this world apart trying to get it to different directions. Well, it has always been similar to today, we just have to read some history and draw our conclusions, the individual being in everyone of us has a flaw, and until we don´t recognize it we won´t stand a chance in advancing.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
@hegetiby I think you are absolutely right how a system switch would not just change the characters to fit it. That takes time, patience, and a realization that the problem cannot be solved with a binary solution. "With us or Against Us" does not work. I agree with @sterlinluxan in that, empathy and love cannot exist in the human mind at the same time as violence and aggression. However, I also believe that at the same moment in time as a human mind is in either state another human mind can be in the opposite. Either state breaks the binary down further, aggression as a scare tactic in self defense, or aggression with the intent to take, harm, gain control. One could argue that either is still aggression, but if the intent and results vary, should their position on the spectrum be the same? If you expand that further and overlay it on the world you create just that, 7 billion dots on a massive spectrum between extremes of what ever idea. For two people to agree 100% in concurrence to the millions of ideas out there is virtually impossible.
Binary just creates a cycle, giving those at extremes push and pull power every so often that is damaging to the whole. Healing the extremes and helping them come a bit closer to the center of the spectrum still allows for differences of ideas but it lessens the disruption caused by the extreme fringes. It is not a binary "We can't contradict others" it's to what extremes do we do so and how do we go about it. It cannot just be a switch into "no order" it needs to be a slow and patient progression towards a denser core while shedding authority bit by bit until the spectrum becomes the right balance. So rather than finding a way to move everyone to one side, the question becomes how do we heal others and expand our communal awareness and understanding without sending them into a state of cognitive dissonance. The rest I believe will naturally come together.