Human Mechanics Insight (Guilt, Dissing, Compromises and Being Too Nice)

0 anthropology  |   January 28, 2015  |     536


This post is about some understanding and insight that I need to unload off my consciousness into the blogosphere.

It is impossible to enjoy dissing others if you don’t spend your energy doing things you don’t feel like; or, to put another way, if you don’t force yourself to be nice to people you don’t actually like. The energy unload (and hence enjoyment) that can be harvested at dissing needs to be accumulated in you first to feel a relief or some sort of powertrip. And to accumulate it you need to either force yourself to be nice to people you dislike; or in general answer to request when those requests didn’t feel necessary.

I realized this because I never get any positive feeling from putting other people down. And then I realized that my “frame of reference” is so tragically different from the norm; by this I mean that for me there is this higher value called truth. I know truth is completely subjective (this is a crucial fact); but I do put truth, and performance and precision and acuteness and caring above all other values.

Then there are people who put power, and establishment and authority and other people’s expectations above all else. Those are generally the people who end up enjoying to diss (put other’s down) others. I then realized that there WERE other frames of reference; somehow I always thought that there was only one frame of reference. Strange isn’t it?

Guilt is an interesting emotion. It needs suport and is entirely artificial; meaning it was created by humans and more precisely by society. Guilt is pushed down our throats at a young age due to the dependency relationship we have as children; we cannot be independant. We depend so much on our parents, and especially on their love. The love we live is a love based on need, a totally different flavor of love compared to the one we have the possiblity to live when fully grown up. Because of this, the parent has power over you; and he can make you do things that are against your will and then give you love in return. This is where the mind comes in and invents the compromise. Now, understand that guilt cannot exist without the support of compromises.

Imagine a situation where you are with a group of people; your friends say, and they all want to go do something which you don’t feel like. “Oh come one, come along”. And yet inside you don’t want. What do you do? There are two things that can happen. First, out of love for your friends and trust in their taste you will follow with an open heart. OR, if your heart is not available, you will compromise. You will go, but you will not like the situation at all and complain silently inside the whole time.

This compromise is the necessary platform that opens the stage for guilt. Once you’ve acquired this behaviour, than you can be expected to compromise and if you don’t; THAT is when guilt is born.

Now if you drop compromise from your life, you will never feel guilt. EVER. I found it an interesting revelation; to never feel guilty. Osho repeats this quite a bit, especially in the series about Tantra. He says to be your full self and never feel guilty about anything. And with this bit of understanding you can now be guilt free naturally once you drop compromises.

There is a phenomena that is well documented where the more people you put together, the lower the level of intelligence. There is a movement to the bottom, to find common ground, or the lowest common denominator. That lowest common denominator can cause problems because if you are trying to achieve something it will limit the possibilities. This is why, in human relationships there is a common behavior where we elect leaders (implicitely or explicitely), who can magically gain the trust of people and be an inspiration and lead the group beyond the common denominator.. Now this is a complex phenomenon in itself.

When someone is being nice to everybody, absolutely everybody, he reproduces the behavior of the lowest common denominator within himself. Constantly adapting to every individual is a lot of work; and by being nice to everybody you’d need to adapt to every one. Now if this person is even just slightly lazy the way to achieve similar results (in others loving you) is by finding the lowest common denominator and sticking to it in all situations. So he will always stay with generalized statements, slightly adapt them be he will systematically dumb down any daring circumstance, critize anyone who takes risks, and systematically appeal to your “common sense”.

These people are very dangerous people, especially in business settings. First you cannot trust anything they say, there is an impactful information loss that happens through his presence. Let’s pretend someone reports a problem to him, and he now needs to pass down this information to the person who is in charge of fixing it. When he meets the person who is supposed to fix it, he will not want to say anything that might offend or cause any discomfort in that person, so the information will be downplayed. And hence the problem itself will be downplayed. The problem will be dissolved in his conception of common sense the reduced to his lowest common denominator; and the person who is supposed to fix it will not be able to really fix it as so much information will be missing. With gradual accumulation your business will loose focus in the cloud of confusion, especially if the said person is in a managerial position.

However, they have much appeal. They will appeal to insecure people; in fact they will feed on other people’s insecurity. By seeing how far these people get in any given organization you can actually measure the ambient level of insecurity. There are better ways to deal with insecurity and to let your organization get crippled by clouds of pleasing confusion. Trust me.

That’s it for today.



Leave a Reply