” Are your assumptions and interpretations shifting or are they static? If they’re changing, how so?”
Many childhood assumptions about the world have not changed fundamentally.
a) Power is rightly wielded by few, poorly yielded by most.
b) Humans generally scramble for relevance among peers and/or hierarchies typically in ways that will support their ambitions. If they cannot, they will attempt to break the peer groupings and/or hierarchies that are not supporting their ambitions.
The ambition is usually a form of power, which can be power over others or less commonly, power over self (locus of control).
But as to rule a) Power is rightly wielded by few, poorly yielded by most, disaster can easily follow an ambition seeker if they are not careful not to pull the rug out from under themselves.
c) People are usually ok as individuals. Couples can be odd but generally fall into several patterns.. However, with groups of 3 or more, a fourth invisible person emerges, which is the “person” that is the group.
Stupidity or brilliance often follows but usually stupidity. It can’t be pinned down to any one individual as they are acting as a trio or more and in a sense under the spell of the invisible fourth they created but cannot always control.
So, these are my elementary school baseline assumptions that have not changed.
My interpretations of the world shift and change. It’s uncommon but when does it’s a paradigm shift for me and I have to recalculate. When I learn and actually ‘get’ a perspective that I didn’t grow up with in a fundamental way, .it challenges all things I thought I knew. It does not eliminate my original interpretation from before, but now I can compare/contrast.
Oh that. I think the word “persuasion” covers it.
In one case, it’s seen as “I hope you change your mind”
In another case, it’s seen as “You will change your mind”Difference I see is % of certainty + amount of dedication to the task.
I think the supreme form of this is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byzantine_rhetoric but there are other ways of doing so.
For example If you want a hard to get password, you can hire of cryptographers and mathematicians to put a bank of computers to the task of solving it……
or you can kidnap the family of the person whose password you want and kill them off one by one, starting with the children, until you are successful.I think a good answer ranges in the middle range between the span.
I can tolerate a level of manipulation, so long as I stay ahead a few moves and have an escape route.But I can always feel it. It’s like pain tolerance.
To me, foundationally, it’s manipulation of fields, like magnetic fields among bars of steel.
I have my set of fields and others have theirs.
I have my bars of steel.and others have their bars of steel.
Chess in a war of words doesn’t function as a metaphor for me as I’m good with written words and have been since I could first write. I win that chess game everytime in my mind because they moved at least some of their pieces because of me.
Differently wired but fascinating commonalities where they exist.
once a while back, got a 29 I think, just into the “lacks empathy” zone, so I suspect I straddle a bit. I notice the bubbles sometimes (othertimes they’re invisible and people react to me as if I committed a sin and I have no idea why).
I can sometimes feel the “You should feel something” pull and I find it annoying, not because I might feel it too so much (although it’s possible to pull me in if I have my guard down, which is rare), but because there’s an attempt to emotionally manipulate me which is irritating.