Ongoing Development (9-10-94)
Transcription of thoughts on Mental Relativity I recorded while developing the theory.
SEPTEMBER 10, 1994
In the past, I've spoken about how men will see dynamic pairs, companion pairs, dependent pairs, and so on. They will always see one positive and one negative from the perspective that we've taken so far. In other words, that whatever dynamic pair relationships their looking at they'll see one positive and one negative, those will be grouped together. We have named those relationships such as dynamic pairs, companion pairs, dependent pairs; those terms are directly correspondent to the concepts of purpose, methodology, evaluation, and motivation. In other words, they see in one place, they make a positive and negative evaluation; looking at one thing they determine a purpose and measure it according to the positive and negative aspects of that particular purpose.
We've also talked about how women perceive these dynamic pairs from this perspective; these pairing relationships differently. So, that women will in one case see a group of pairs as positive and negative just as men do. But, then they'll see another one as being all positive. Both of the measurements are positive. Another one, both of them are negative. And the other one, the ones that the men see positive and seen as negative by women; the one that women see negative as positive, anyway.... that's the relationship among the pairings.
Now, when it comes to looking towards purpose, men are going to see purpose in only one place -- they'll see it in the future. They'll see it as what's the purpose they are trying to achieve. However, purpose for women actually is divided between the future and the present. When you look at, in other words it's kind of divided between the state you are trying to achieve and the process of getting there. That's where purpose is, it's not just where you are trying to get, it's divided between the two. So, when women are looking at that, instead of seeing a single purpose, with positive and negative, they are going to see two purposes, one of which will be evaluated positively, one of which will be evaluated negatively.
Now, I'm looking at the idea of, for example, having a clean house. Or storing up food for the winter -- that's a good example, it's right down to survival. Suppose you look at the future purpose and you say I'm going to look at that one negatively. Well, that means I don't want to starve in the winter, so I will save up food now, so then you concentrate on looking at the saving up of food as the positive, and you look into the future as avoiding a negative. As a result of that, when you finally arrive at that point, where you have actually stored up food for the winter, and you don't starve, all you've done is prevented a negative thing from happening, and the best that you can get is to reach a zero point. You can say, I have prevented myself from starving, and therefore I am neutral.
That's the most a woman can hope to get, if she is looking at the future purposes as avoiding a negative. That's never going to satisfy. It's never going to fulfill, it's only going to satisfy. On the other hand, if you look towards the future purpose, and you say my future purpose is to have all kinds of good food to eat during the winter, then all of a sudden, you're looking at the future purpose as a positive that you want to have good things as opposed to want to avoid a bad thing, and then you evaluate gathering the food in terms of the negative purposes of having to work too hard. Now, at that point, it limits the size and scope of what you will achieve. Because you are saying, if I have to put in too many costs here, than I can lower how much I'll work, as long as I still have some good food to eat for the winter.
But, you'll never get down to zero. Zero would be not having enough to eat. Meaning that you'll never find the costs that you are incurring along the way of preparing all this food, will ever be so great, so negative that they will outweigh having at least enough food to get by. When you turn it around the other way, that's the female version of justification.
Now, men just do not justify like that. It's just not an issue because they don't look at purposes as being only holding negative. In other words, only avoiding a negative. They look at them as what the pros and cons are of this purpose.
It will bring me this, and it will avoid that. Everything to them does double duty, but they see it actually as a single purpose that has ramifications in preventing negatives which naturally happen when you achieve positives. However, for women, you're not going to look at that. You're going to look at either the positive or negative aspects of what you're trying to achieve for the future, what you're trying to escape from, or what you're trying to obtain. And in doing that, you will then figure in the costs which is something that men don't do the same way either.
So, costs would be something to do with their methodology. Saying now that we've selected the purpose which has these positive benefits and prevents these negative drains, then let's look at the methodology that has more positive aspects that negative aspects. So it's a balancing act for them. They go from methodology to methodology to methodology and select the one that has the most positive aspects and the least negative. Whereas, women are going to look at methodology as either being a positive or negative thing and how much. Rather than looking at it as having positive and negative sides.
So, when you're out shopping for example, if you look at the positive aspects of purpose right now immediately then you say, "Oh, I want that, I've gotta have that now. And the negative things go to the future in terms of your purposes, so you say negatively then my methodology will go there or my purpose for the future is to avoid the umm, umm, to avoid having to go bankrupt, because I bought this. But, I'll worry about that later. Like Scarlett O'Hara said, I'll think about that tomorrow, or I don't want to think about that today, I'll think about that tomorrow.
Putting the negative off into the future, trying to avoid it later, that's where the temptation arises for women to get trapped in getting immediate gratification of things they want now, and then suffering for it later, which is very impractical, and leaves you open to the ravages of the real world. On the other hand, you can achieve more fulfillment, you can achieve the same amount of fulfillment and more satisfaction along the way, by just making sure that even though either way goes, you can put the negative towards the future, and
look at the positive now, or you can put the positive to the future and look at the negative now. That doesn't mean you're going to be a negative person, what it means is that you say, if I want to have this wonderful thing for myself in the future, or if I want to be in a state where I'm comfortable financially in the future, then right now, at this moment in time, I will not buy this, because not buying that, builds a stronger future for myself.
On the other hand if you look at it and say, I want to avoid having monetary problems later, so I won't buy this now, suddenly everything comes out negative, because you want it now, and by wanting it now, all you're going to achieve by not getting it is to prevent a negative situation later, meaning that the most you can hope for is to arrive at zero, neutral. But, later on you won't have what you wanted to get, but you also won't have to suffer from monetary crisis.
When you put in the two negatives like that, that's what makes it very painful, to apparently do the right thing. We're trained to do that because men are going to going to try and group things together again. They're going to look at the positive and negative aspects of what's going on now and the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the future. Whereas women are going to see one as.....they're going to look at either two negatives or two positives in that case. So, if you look at the two negatives and two positives, then if you have the negative thing of not getting what you want, so you can avoid a negative thing later, and get back to zero.
You are still dealing with two negatives, but if you take one being, if you look at it as two positives, then you can end up saying, here is something that I want, but by putting myself in the position of not buying it, which then, not buying becomes the positive, because, look what I am doing, it's a positive action. I am exercising financial restraint. You hear women all the time talking about oh, I was good, I didn't eat that, or I didn't buy that hat that I really wanted, or I didn't get that dress that I wanted.
Umm, that kind of thing about being good is absolutely perfect female problem solving, because you are saying here is this thing that I want, and instead of looking at Oh, I'm making this sacrifice so that I can avoid something negative later, you're saying, I'm doing this positive thing, so that I can get something positive later. That's the way to look at it, because you have to have the positive and the positive where men are going to see positive and negative. They'll be evaluating the pros and cons, we have to evaluate either in terms of pros or in terms of cons. It's when we evaluate on the negatives, that we have a negative life, and the positives where we have a positive life. And so the twist is really up to us.
Now, I don't know what the male equivalent of how they get into justification is. I really can't deal with the subjective view of that. Clearly from the outside, you can see how they justify by saying, here's this positive thing later, and as a result of it, it has these positive things versus these negative. So it's so much positive. Now, I'll evaluate what's going on at the moment. That has a certain amount of negatives, but the negatives compared to the positives by percentage, that is less of a negative, than the positives compared to the negative of the purpose I'm going to.
The thing is they don't see the scale between the two. They don't figure duration, they don't look at the notion that over time, they may be paying this continuously negative cost, while the goal recedes in front of them. Other things come up along the way. They end up all wrapped up in the effort to achieve the goal, and even though they see it themselves, as a negative, they keep looking towards the future and saying, but there's this highly positive state, compared to the negative attributes of this purpose in the future and therefore it's something to be highly desired.
But, they don't realize that when they weigh that, they're not comparing it's size, comparing to the size of the cost. They look at only the cost they are paying at the moment, compared to the benefits essentially that they're going overall benefits that they'll get later on. And they never figure the total cost that they pay along the way, which is how they get into ruts objectively, but subjectively what does that feel like? I don't know.
For women though, it's quite clear that subjectively it's an issue of whether you're saying there's something I want to avoid in the future. That's going to be your first mistake. I want to avoid that in the future. And when you say I want to avoid that in the future, then you are going to look at something you have to do negatively now to avoid that in the future. So, you end up having a negative life. And that's valid, but it's justification. Because that will find you maybe satisfaction, but you won't find any fulfillment, except by accident. And because satisfaction is the male domain of what they're looking for, if you make that your primary, and then fulfillment takes a back seat, you're not going to be satisfied as a woman.
So, the effort for men is again, it twists a little bit. They want satisfaction and fulfillment, they are thinking about both of them, they blend them into one thing. They look at it as a single item. We look at satisfaction and fulfillment as two completely different items. And as a result of it, the satisfaction factor is what we shouldn't be going for, that will be what we're looking for, whenever we are dealing only with our reason, instead of our emotions. We have the ability to use reason or emotions. Men put their reason and their emotions together, and look at it as one thing. So, when we split them up, if we just use our reason and we say I want to avoid this thing in the future, then I have to do this thing now that I don't like.
So, you end up paying the costs, and all you get is avoiding a larger consequence. But on the other hand, if you are instead of looking at this cost that you pay to avoid a consequence, you look at the goal you wish to achieve and say this is what I want. Then you look at everything you do as a benefit, instead of a cost. And you look at the two positives.
Now, obviously I've covered a lot of ground that has a lot of very interlaced and twisted, and hard to follow relationships. We talked about the four kinds of pairs, and how men would see always one positive, one negative. But, women would share that in one point of view, and in another they'd see both positive, both negative. And then in the other one see exactly the reverse reading of positive and negative.
When we're talking about dealing with what we want for the future, and what we'll do now to get it, then in that case, men are going to see the positive and negative aspects of the future. And the positive and negative aspects now. They are going to compare the ratio of the positive to the negative now, and take that and compare that to the ratio of positive and negative of the future. And as long as the ratio of the immediate momentary flash cost that they are paying right now, the ratio is that negative of the moment does not exceed the positives of the future, then the judgment is that it's worth paying that cost, and they get into justification by not realizing that cost is cumulative.
For women on the other hand, the danger is that subjectively, we are going to be looking instead at either two negatives or two positives. A negative aspect in the future and the past, versus the positive aspect in the future, in the past or the present. In other words, when we select our purpose, if we select a purpose that's a negative purpose to avoid a negative, we're still looking at the negative side of it, even if that's what we're trying to avoid. And so you say that we don't want to suffer this, and therefore we will do or not do something now that we don't like to avoid that problem later. In other words, we feel like we're sacrificing in moderation, we end up having nothing but a negative view.
But, if we look towards a future purpose and couch it positively, whereas here is something that we want to achieve, then we look at what's going on right now at this time, and we find a positive benefit, which is why we say oh, I've been good, I did this, or I didn't eat that, or I didn't buy that, because we can say in summary, if we want to look at the future, and say, "I don't want to have credit problems in the future, then I won't buy the thing I want now." That whole equation sounds like a negative to us. Which men would never see, because they look at the positive and negative of the future, versus the positive and negative now. But, for us if we look at the negative, the future of avoiding credit problems, then everything that we don't buy now is seen as a sacrifice, which is a negative.
On the other hand, if we look to the future and say I want to be financially comfortable in the future, which amounts to the same impact, but it's the positive aspect of it; then if I want to be financially secure in the future, then every time that I don't buy something now, I see it as a positive step I am taking towards building my future. And therefore, it becomes much more palatable. That side of it, again, will take care of our fulfillment. Dealing with it on the negatives, really only deals with our satisfaction. Our satisfaction is going to be based on when we do what's reasonably right. Our fulfillment will be based on when we do what is emotionally best. And as a result of that, men never separate the two. They judge everything in terms of satisfaction and fulfillment while they are looking at the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the future, versus the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the present.
So, for us, we have to separate our satisfaction from our fulfillment, and in fact, whenever we're dealing only with satisfaction, we'll be looking at negatives. And whenever we're dealing with fulfillment, we'll be looking at positives. So, that's what makes women as a breed, appear to be less practical, because a woman who is not justifying, a woman who is just problem solving for her life, and not suffering things that are inappropriate and inefficient for her personally, will not be dealing only with satisfaction, will not be dealing only with reason, but, will be dealing only with fulfillment. Men look at that and say, "Why are they so impractical?" They can't understand why we're riding down the railroad track on only one rail, from their point of view, and the side that's holding reason isn't being used at all.
Well, in fact it doesn't have to be used. In fact, if it is used at all, or just by itself, we'll only be dealing with negatives. And if it's used in conjunction with fulfillment, then we're fighting against ourselves, because we'll always be in eternal conflict saying well this is reasonable, but that side is emotionally fulfilling, and in fact, men cannot separate reason from emotion. They blend the two together. We use one or the other. And in the case of using one or the other, one will appear to be negative, and one will appear to be positive.
Therefore, if we are to find fulfillment, which is what women want most, because that's the internal aspect, as opposed to satisfaction of looking externally, then in that case, we are going to want to ignore the reasonable side of the argument; let it take care of itself and deal with the emotional side of the argument, and feel what is best for our future.
Another thought on this issue, is that the area in which women leave themselves open to problems is that if you are only considering the positive side, if there is a negative consequence, looming in the future, that requires a sacrifice to made now, it's not going to be evaluated at all. In other words, whenever there's something that has no positive aspect to it at all, no good can be seen, or very little, so little in fact, that it would be overlooked when you are trying to determine what is a good thing to strive for in the future. Then if there's this big negative thing, it becomes invisible, because it's too negative, so you don't see it. And as a result of not seeing it, you don't plan for it, because it would require making sacrifices now to avoid a negative thing.
As a result of it, that's why we end up having to rely historically on men to deal with a lot of the practical matters. It's not we're not capable of it, but every time we move into being aware of what's going on negatively, we're turning our mind to the positive. Whenever we look at what will satisfy us, we are shutting our mind to fulfillment. Whenever we're trying to prevent negative things from happening, then we have to be scanning for them with our sonar out there, or our radar, looking for negative things on the horizon. It makes us negatively oriented, and as a result of it, then we avoid all of these pitfalls, but the only good things that happen to us, happen by accident as a by-product of having avoided negatives, and that's not very good for personal fulfillment, and yet in an objective sense, looking for one's survival is a much better trait to look for the negative things.
So, if our purpose only was survival, only objective survival to carry on the species, then we should devote ourselves totally to the negative, and look out for the things that could hurt us, and at that point, or hurt those that would carry on the species - - our children, and then make whatever sacrifices are necessary to prevent that, and we will never be caught unawares by the world. However, we'll also never find fulfillment, except by accident. If we want to be fulfilled, then in that case, we need to have an environment that in a sense takes care of not hurting us. Takes care of protecting us.
That's the function that men have fulfilled throughout history. Because they do not get negative when they see the negative side. They see a balance between the negative and the positive, and so they can adjust things so that they are finding themselves positive fulfillment at the same time that they are aware of the negative things that require them to try and achieve satisfaction. Because of this, nothing sneaks up on them, unawares in the external world, because they are always scanning for the negative as well as the positive, and there won't be anything that won't show up on their radar.
On the other hand, what they cannot do, or cannot see, is they cannot see the value of impractical things that only have meaning for the heart, very easily. Those things happen to them by accident, to us, we can create that just by the way we view our world, ourselves, our environment. And so, that relationship has existed.
As we get into a society that is farther away from survival, then the immediate survival need of having a man to protect you, begins to become less and less important, because there is a government, and there is welfare, and there are medical doctors, and there are counseling offices, and when a problem comes up, it usually doesn't come up immediately, so that it stares you in the face, and threatens your survival. There's a delay factor that society has built in to give a lead time to be able to deal with these problems, and as a result, even when we're not scanning for them, we become aware of them, before they become aware of us. In other words, before the problem actually lands on our doorstep, we are aware it's coming down the street.
Therefore, the need for a man to protect us has become less and less and less, in our civilized society. But, now it's moving into a situation where it becomes more and more and more, because as we move through that period of time, say around the 1950's or so, where survival was not something that was immediate to us, and we could see it coming. But, life was still pretty simple and easy to figure out. Then we were doing pretty good, that was our age. But, right now we're taking society and saying let's move it to a new kind of survival; survival financially, survival politically, survival socially; where you can ruin your entire future by one slip-up.
As a result of that, that's where men are going to excel again is in this complex environment of having to pay a lifelong price for one indiscretion. That kind of thing makes one more and more susceptible to the consequences if one is not scanning for negatives, and as a result men become important again in our lives to handle that, but that is a male response to a society that has gotten so far away from survival that men don't have any reason to be needed by women. They've lost that half, the fulfillment half of their lives no longer needs them, which leaves them unsatisfied. And as a result of that, subconsciously as a collective subconscious, the male species fashions problems for them to solve. So that they create their own justifications built into the way the financial world, and the social world, and the political world operate.
Now, at this point, instead of looking at social suicide or political suicide or financial suicide, which is exactly what happens when you lose your survival capability, we could create a society in which those things were not so binary, in which those things, you could still see them coming, you could still see them looming. But, every time you move towards that opportunity to have an infrastructure that serves as your radar, and can point things out, then the male side of the species is no longer needed as much by the female side of the species.
This is an intrinsic dichotomy in what's best for one, compared to what's best for the other. It's the place in which they agree oppositely. The one in which men see one thing as positive, and the other as negative, and women see the negative as positive, and the positive as negative, from their point of view. This was the one area of paradox, and the one that can never be resolved. All we can do, is try and strike a balance between the two, so that it becomes beneficial to have men in your life, but at the same time it does not become essential to have men in your life, and that is a compromise for us, because we are not having complete independence, but at the same time, we do not have complete reliance either.
And as far as it goes for men that although we don't theoretically need them, instead they find that although they are not completely needed, they are also highly desired, because then it frees us up from having to plug the gap of trying to base that radar on ourselves and deal with the negative side of the equation, and lose track of our own fulfillment, because in that sense we are binary, we can only do one at a time, whereas men are doing both continuously.
So, the only way out of this fix is for each individual to determine if they wish to build a lifestyle in which they don't have to think about the practical side of life at all, and have a man in their life to handle that for them, or highly justified woman, who's going to be thinking only in terms of the negatives, and never find fulfillment, but find satisfaction, but when all is said and done be completely unfulfilled, that would do also, because she's only going to be looking at the negatives.
Whether we want to have that kind of a person in our lives; either a negative person as a woman, or a person who's balanced as a man, but takes care of all of that for us. Or if we want to carve in our society a role in which we pick up the slack, and don't find ourselves completely fulfilled, or if we try to build an infrastructure outside of ourselves that is even more forward looking than the infrastructure society provides, and as a result it provides for us that kind of forward looking radar and we can then give up that role without having an actual physical person taking care of that for us, which
could be like making a lot of money, and putting it into blind trust accounts and things as a woman, or setting up organizations, or having stock in many different companies plus savings account, plus properties someplace, so no matter what the economy does, there's always a certain amount of money coming in, but then remember, unless you have a man in your life looking out for you, you have to trust that the accountants are doing what they should for you. You have to trust that the people who are your business managers, or the head of your companies or whatever, that they are doing what you want them to and acting in your best interest. Because you won't be checking for that and you'll leave yourself open to a blind side, by doing that. So, the only other way is to either take a part of yourself at some point, and still check up and see how things are going, or to have a man there doing it for you.
One way around this is by having a regular check-in point where you have one week a year or perhaps one day a month when you sit down and deal with your satisfactions and the rest of the time deal with your fulfillment. As a result of that you could then say I'm not going to consider this, but it comes up on your calendar once a month, and says today is the day to evaluate how well everybody is meeting your needs, and then you can take them from personal relationships, all the way to your business situations, and look at how well people are meeting your needs, and then make decisions based on satisfaction, which will be kind of a negative day, because you are evaluating is there anything negative out there that I don't like, and what resources to I have to give up to apply to that negative to get rid of it.
That's going to be a negative day essentially, but you'll be very satisfied at the end of it, because you'll have allocated your resources as efficiently as possible to plug all the gaps and solve all the negatives or prevent the negatives. And then, the rest of the days of the month, you can just sit back and be fulfilled, and say now what do I want to go after, and feel good about every step your taking to get there. So, this might be a future in problem solving software again, is to create calendar warnings that are justification alerts and they don't say,
"oh, oh, you're beginning to justify, they just say to keep from justifying too far, to fill in your blind side, at regular intervals, here is a reminder that this kind of thing needs to be checked up about this frequently. Certainly if things change unexpectedly in the middle, you're going to be caught unawares. But, if you have some experience to go on, and you look over the past cycles that have occurred, you can set your evaluation times, so that they are close enough that these kinds of cycles are not at all expected to happen historically before you have a chance to evaluate, using your satisfaction and looking at things in terms of the negatives. That you have a good cushion between when things are expected to occur, and where you put your next warnings.
But again, a justifications calendar, I guess would be the feature, and it would provide regular alarms and alerts at different frequencies because the things that happen in our lives have different wave forms with different frequencies, and as a result of it, if we take them as individual things, we can then determine how often we ought to be altered to various different items. We may decide to move some earlier than we need to, because we may want to group them all together again to have a satisfaction day.
When we evaluate these negatives, so even if it's something as every six weeks, and something else is every 2 months, and something else is every 3 months; if we did it monthly, then it would be too early for the six week thing, too early for the 2 month or 3 month thing, but we get them all done at one time, and wouldn't have to do them again. So, it's being a little over-efficient, but we're only putting a portion of our month, say one day down to dealing with all of these issues.
We can get them all out of the way at once, rather than being reminded this day, and sometimes 3 days in a row, and sometimes 2 days of fulfillment, and then one day of satisfaction, and someday a week with nothing. That irregular schedule is rather erratic and keeps interrupting the peace of our fulfillment, so this would also be something that could be a feature that could auto group the cycles, so that the things you've listed, there will be the lowest common denominator that would allow you to view everything before a complete cycle has occurred, and that would be your one day, when everything would be grouped, and it would remind you all at once, and also indicate when it's normal cycle would be up, so you know how far ahead of the game you are, how overprotective you are of your environment, by viewing it to quickly in succession. All of this could be handled automatically, and would make on heck of a nifty little calendar, definitely now that I'm thinking about it, and this is clarified into a feature. We definitely want to put in that justification calendar as a feature in the original problem solving software.
Remember it will have to have a different form taken for a male justification calendar, versus a female justification calendar, keeping in mind that our users may be highly justified and therefore we'll have to name them differently then male and female because a highly justified woman would find that she would be looking towards the male justification calendar as being the one that had most meaning to her, because she's trying to maintain her negative justifications. So, until she uses problem solving software enough, and gets herself out of those justifications and out of dealing only with the negatives, then she would not find any use in the one that would be called the female justification calendar. So, we need to have two forms, and we could call one the reason justification calendar, and the emotion justification calendar or the satisfaction and fulfillment justification calendars, might be a better name for them.
So, let's line this out, and when this gets typed up, we'll send it off to Mark to try and pull out what he can about this feature and put it into a single description of the item, if I haven't taken care of it myself.
An interesting side note is the effect that when you are doing these different kinds of justifications, what impact that has on those around you. There's a tendency for those who are looking at things on the negative side for women, especially is to be constantly complaining about the way things are when it's nothing that they can change, because they'll be frustrated about the fact that they can't do anything about a negative, and as a result they'll complain and complain and complain.
As a matter of fact, men will do the same thing when they are looking at the negative side of their equation. Women who are completely on the positive side of the equation and men who are dealing with the positive side at the moment, have a tendency to talk about what they are going to do, and wonderful things that are going to happen, before they've actually happened. So, on the negative side, it's generally complaining about existing negative situations that nothing can be done about. The problematic interpersonal relationship on the positive side is to constantly talk about the wonderful things that can happen, might happen, are down the line, that haven't actually occurred yet.
So, it's important for us to remember that if we're going to get out of justifications, or if we're going to be dealing in any given moment at the positive or the negative, is that when we're dealing with the negative side, and this is probably equally good advice for male or female. When we're looking at the negative side and dealing with this is an upcoming consequence or this is a consequence that already exists that I can take steps to get rid of; when you're looking at that side of it, only deal with things that you can actually do something about. And if there's something that you can't either do about it, then cope and coping means not telling everybody about how terrible it is, that is just venting some of the frustration at being inactive, by trying to enlist others in your cause.
The real purpose behind that is to say " things are terrible, I can't do anything about it, maybe you've got an idea is what it really means, or maybe you can lend some support". But, in fact, it simply comes across as complaining. Whereas, the person who is telling about the wonderful thing that's going to happen in the future is actually saying, "look this is appearing on the future, sure it's not certain, but they don't state that part, they just say look at this wonderful thing that's going to happen, isn't that great, not because they want to lord it over anybody else or point out how much better things are for them than for the other person they are talking to, but because they want to share something good that they see happening, so that the other person can experience the joy of it in advance as well.
Now, that's the motivation that drives the positive looking person forward is to be able to experience the joy of having achieved the goal before they actually get there. Meaning that that's why it's a joy to be able to do things that others might see as sacrifices, they do not appear as sacrifices to the forward looking positive individual, because they are essentially saying look at the bricks that I am building that are creating the pathway that will take me to where my goal is. Each time I lay one, I'm closer to the wonderful thing, but I can see it already, and because I see it already, I enjoy it before it's even happened.
In fact, for those kinds of people, you can go through and build this path with all of these bricks and lay them, and by the time you get to the end, if the goal is snatched away from you at the last moment, you can still be almost as happy, because you were able to enjoy it, without it actually happening. In other words, you enjoyed the existence of it, before it actually existed. Therefore, it was just a decision at the last point, whether it would be only a passing state or an on-going process of that goal's existence that you could continue to enjoy farther and farther past the crucial moment of bringing it into inception.
For the negative person, these things might go away all by themselves. At the last moment the unavoidable consequence might completely disappear and evaporate before it actually comes in to plague you. That can happen too. But, instead, the negative looking person is going to be constantly complaining about the situation looking for help, looking for help, and then it may turn out that no help was necessary at all. But, notice that when we're dealing with interpersonal relationships, it's the concept of saying this is too good to keep for myself, I want to share.
Because when you share, it actually makes it better by making the future look even more positive to the person, so everybody can join in it and then something like a breeder-reactor occurs where you start playing against each other, kind of like a laser, back and forth between the mirrors until you finally get to point when it's intensity is increased for each participant, and then there's the negative
person who is trying to get help and by continuing to complain, the benefit of that for the negative looking person is that eventually it spreads out where more and more people are complaining about it and sometimes something that no individual or small group of individuals could handle, will have a large holistic effect by a great number of people becoming involved and it becomes a social movement that changes the unchangeable. These are the benefits of sharing. The problems occur when the negative person tries to share with the positive, or where the positive tries to share with the negative. Very often, we find in our society, because it is a male society, designed by males, is that the fulfillment side is the one that completely eludes them is to be 100% fulfillment. Although they can throw themselves into being 100% satisfaction, and that 100% satisfaction is actually what we see as 100% satisfaction is when you are blending satisfaction and fulfillment.
What happens is the general approach that people except in our western society is either to say well, I've got a balanced life, or gee things are negative. For the people who are saying gee, everything is rosy, they're called optimists and utopians and they are not seen favorably because it's like denying the real consequences that exist that we have to complain about to get more people involved with for a male society perspective. On the other hand, for the individual who is positively minded, and sees things as "I don't see any negative things around me at all" There's no negatives in my life, and they're constantly saying how can I make things better, oh wouldn't that be better? Isn't that joyous to imagine it better, gee I'll take these steps that I need to take to make that better, and every one is a positive step because it leads me towards something positive.
Well, those people sound so unrealistic, and it makes the people who are complaining feel bad, because to be positive is to be desired, as a state, subjectively. However, when one achieves that state, one becomes completely impractical. And by becoming completely impractical, then one is denying the existence of purely practical negative situations that are very real. And that's why there is a difficulty in communication.
For myself personally, I was very positive. I once wanted to have a camp-out in the backyard with some friends, and it started to rain, so I had a sign made up and put it inside that said camp-in, and we did it inside. In my middle adult life I learned to be negative with the way society was going, and now I'm coming back to the positive, and believe me it feels a lot better. I think that's going to be a lot better for both males and females to think of.
November 29, 1994
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
January 7, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
February 3, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
February 11, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
SEPTEMBER 10, 1994
In the past, I've spoken about how men will see dynamic pairs, companion pairs, dependent pairs, and so on. They will always see one positive and one negative from the perspective that we've taken so far. In other words, that whatever dynamic pair relationships their looking at they'll see one positive and one negative, those will be grouped together. We have named those relationships such as dynamic pairs, companion pairs, dependent pairs; those terms are directly correspondent to the concepts of purpose, methodology, evaluation, and motivation. In other words, they see in one place, they make a positive and negative evaluation; looking at one thing they determine a purpose and measure it according to the positive and negative aspects of that particular purpose.
We've also talked about how women perceive these dynamic pairs from this perspective; these pairing relationships differently. So, that women will in one case see a group of pairs as positive and negative just as men do. But, then they'll see another one as being all positive. Both of the measurements are positive. Another one, both of them are negative. And the other one, the ones that the men see positive and seen as negative by women; the one that women see negative as positive, anyway.... that's the relationship among the pairings.
Now, when it comes to looking towards purpose, men are going to see purpose in only one place -- they'll see it in the future. They'll see it as what's the purpose they are trying to achieve. However, purpose for women actually is divided between the future and the present. When you look at, in other words it's kind of divided between the state you are trying to achieve and the process of getting there. That's where purpose is, it's not just where you are trying to get, it's divided between the two. So, when women are looking at that, instead of seeing a single purpose, with positive and negative, they are going to see two purposes, one of which will be evaluated positively, one of which will be evaluated negatively.
Now, I'm looking at the idea of, for example, having a clean house. Or storing up food for the winter -- that's a good example, it's right down to survival. Suppose you look at the future purpose and you say I'm going to look at that one negatively. Well, that means I don't want to starve in the winter, so I will save up food now, so then you concentrate on looking at the saving up of food as the positive, and you look into the future as avoiding a negative. As a result of that, when you finally arrive at that point, where you have actually stored up food for the winter, and you don't starve, all you've done is prevented a negative thing from happening, and the best that you can get is to reach a zero point. You can say, I have prevented myself from starving, and therefore I am neutral.
That's the most a woman can hope to get, if she is looking at the future purposes as avoiding a negative. That's never going to satisfy. It's never going to fulfill, it's only going to satisfy. On the other hand, if you look towards the future purpose, and you say my future purpose is to have all kinds of good food to eat during the winter, then all of a sudden, you're looking at the future purpose as a positive that you want to have good things as opposed to want to avoid a bad thing, and then you evaluate gathering the food in terms of the negative purposes of having to work too hard. Now, at that point, it limits the size and scope of what you will achieve. Because you are saying, if I have to put in too many costs here, than I can lower how much I'll work, as long as I still have some good food to eat for the winter.
But, you'll never get down to zero. Zero would be not having enough to eat. Meaning that you'll never find the costs that you are incurring along the way of preparing all this food, will ever be so great, so negative that they will outweigh having at least enough food to get by. When you turn it around the other way, that's the female version of justification.
Now, men just do not justify like that. It's just not an issue because they don't look at purposes as being only holding negative. In other words, only avoiding a negative. They look at them as what the pros and cons are of this purpose.
It will bring me this, and it will avoid that. Everything to them does double duty, but they see it actually as a single purpose that has ramifications in preventing negatives which naturally happen when you achieve positives. However, for women, you're not going to look at that. You're going to look at either the positive or negative aspects of what you're trying to achieve for the future, what you're trying to escape from, or what you're trying to obtain. And in doing that, you will then figure in the costs which is something that men don't do the same way either.
So, costs would be something to do with their methodology. Saying now that we've selected the purpose which has these positive benefits and prevents these negative drains, then let's look at the methodology that has more positive aspects that negative aspects. So it's a balancing act for them. They go from methodology to methodology to methodology and select the one that has the most positive aspects and the least negative. Whereas, women are going to look at methodology as either being a positive or negative thing and how much. Rather than looking at it as having positive and negative sides.
So, when you're out shopping for example, if you look at the positive aspects of purpose right now immediately then you say, "Oh, I want that, I've gotta have that now. And the negative things go to the future in terms of your purposes, so you say negatively then my methodology will go there or my purpose for the future is to avoid the umm, umm, to avoid having to go bankrupt, because I bought this. But, I'll worry about that later. Like Scarlett O'Hara said, I'll think about that tomorrow, or I don't want to think about that today, I'll think about that tomorrow.
Putting the negative off into the future, trying to avoid it later, that's where the temptation arises for women to get trapped in getting immediate gratification of things they want now, and then suffering for it later, which is very impractical, and leaves you open to the ravages of the real world. On the other hand, you can achieve more fulfillment, you can achieve the same amount of fulfillment and more satisfaction along the way, by just making sure that even though either way goes, you can put the negative towards the future, and
look at the positive now, or you can put the positive to the future and look at the negative now. That doesn't mean you're going to be a negative person, what it means is that you say, if I want to have this wonderful thing for myself in the future, or if I want to be in a state where I'm comfortable financially in the future, then right now, at this moment in time, I will not buy this, because not buying that, builds a stronger future for myself.
On the other hand if you look at it and say, I want to avoid having monetary problems later, so I won't buy this now, suddenly everything comes out negative, because you want it now, and by wanting it now, all you're going to achieve by not getting it is to prevent a negative situation later, meaning that the most you can hope for is to arrive at zero, neutral. But, later on you won't have what you wanted to get, but you also won't have to suffer from monetary crisis.
When you put in the two negatives like that, that's what makes it very painful, to apparently do the right thing. We're trained to do that because men are going to going to try and group things together again. They're going to look at the positive and negative aspects of what's going on now and the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the future. Whereas women are going to see one as.....they're going to look at either two negatives or two positives in that case. So, if you look at the two negatives and two positives, then if you have the negative thing of not getting what you want, so you can avoid a negative thing later, and get back to zero.
You are still dealing with two negatives, but if you take one being, if you look at it as two positives, then you can end up saying, here is something that I want, but by putting myself in the position of not buying it, which then, not buying becomes the positive, because, look what I am doing, it's a positive action. I am exercising financial restraint. You hear women all the time talking about oh, I was good, I didn't eat that, or I didn't buy that hat that I really wanted, or I didn't get that dress that I wanted.
Umm, that kind of thing about being good is absolutely perfect female problem solving, because you are saying here is this thing that I want, and instead of looking at Oh, I'm making this sacrifice so that I can avoid something negative later, you're saying, I'm doing this positive thing, so that I can get something positive later. That's the way to look at it, because you have to have the positive and the positive where men are going to see positive and negative. They'll be evaluating the pros and cons, we have to evaluate either in terms of pros or in terms of cons. It's when we evaluate on the negatives, that we have a negative life, and the positives where we have a positive life. And so the twist is really up to us.
Now, I don't know what the male equivalent of how they get into justification is. I really can't deal with the subjective view of that. Clearly from the outside, you can see how they justify by saying, here's this positive thing later, and as a result of it, it has these positive things versus these negative. So it's so much positive. Now, I'll evaluate what's going on at the moment. That has a certain amount of negatives, but the negatives compared to the positives by percentage, that is less of a negative, than the positives compared to the negative of the purpose I'm going to.
The thing is they don't see the scale between the two. They don't figure duration, they don't look at the notion that over time, they may be paying this continuously negative cost, while the goal recedes in front of them. Other things come up along the way. They end up all wrapped up in the effort to achieve the goal, and even though they see it themselves, as a negative, they keep looking towards the future and saying, but there's this highly positive state, compared to the negative attributes of this purpose in the future and therefore it's something to be highly desired.
But, they don't realize that when they weigh that, they're not comparing it's size, comparing to the size of the cost. They look at only the cost they are paying at the moment, compared to the benefits essentially that they're going overall benefits that they'll get later on. And they never figure the total cost that they pay along the way, which is how they get into ruts objectively, but subjectively what does that feel like? I don't know.
For women though, it's quite clear that subjectively it's an issue of whether you're saying there's something I want to avoid in the future. That's going to be your first mistake. I want to avoid that in the future. And when you say I want to avoid that in the future, then you are going to look at something you have to do negatively now to avoid that in the future. So, you end up having a negative life. And that's valid, but it's justification. Because that will find you maybe satisfaction, but you won't find any fulfillment, except by accident. And because satisfaction is the male domain of what they're looking for, if you make that your primary, and then fulfillment takes a back seat, you're not going to be satisfied as a woman.
So, the effort for men is again, it twists a little bit. They want satisfaction and fulfillment, they are thinking about both of them, they blend them into one thing. They look at it as a single item. We look at satisfaction and fulfillment as two completely different items. And as a result of it, the satisfaction factor is what we shouldn't be going for, that will be what we're looking for, whenever we are dealing only with our reason, instead of our emotions. We have the ability to use reason or emotions. Men put their reason and their emotions together, and look at it as one thing. So, when we split them up, if we just use our reason and we say I want to avoid this thing in the future, then I have to do this thing now that I don't like.
So, you end up paying the costs, and all you get is avoiding a larger consequence. But on the other hand, if you are instead of looking at this cost that you pay to avoid a consequence, you look at the goal you wish to achieve and say this is what I want. Then you look at everything you do as a benefit, instead of a cost. And you look at the two positives.
Now, obviously I've covered a lot of ground that has a lot of very interlaced and twisted, and hard to follow relationships. We talked about the four kinds of pairs, and how men would see always one positive, one negative. But, women would share that in one point of view, and in another they'd see both positive, both negative. And then in the other one see exactly the reverse reading of positive and negative.
When we're talking about dealing with what we want for the future, and what we'll do now to get it, then in that case, men are going to see the positive and negative aspects of the future. And the positive and negative aspects now. They are going to compare the ratio of the positive to the negative now, and take that and compare that to the ratio of positive and negative of the future. And as long as the ratio of the immediate momentary flash cost that they are paying right now, the ratio is that negative of the moment does not exceed the positives of the future, then the judgment is that it's worth paying that cost, and they get into justification by not realizing that cost is cumulative.
For women on the other hand, the danger is that subjectively, we are going to be looking instead at either two negatives or two positives. A negative aspect in the future and the past, versus the positive aspect in the future, in the past or the present. In other words, when we select our purpose, if we select a purpose that's a negative purpose to avoid a negative, we're still looking at the negative side of it, even if that's what we're trying to avoid. And so you say that we don't want to suffer this, and therefore we will do or not do something now that we don't like to avoid that problem later. In other words, we feel like we're sacrificing in moderation, we end up having nothing but a negative view.
But, if we look towards a future purpose and couch it positively, whereas here is something that we want to achieve, then we look at what's going on right now at this time, and we find a positive benefit, which is why we say oh, I've been good, I did this, or I didn't eat that, or I didn't buy that, because we can say in summary, if we want to look at the future, and say, "I don't want to have credit problems in the future, then I won't buy the thing I want now." That whole equation sounds like a negative to us. Which men would never see, because they look at the positive and negative of the future, versus the positive and negative now. But, for us if we look at the negative, the future of avoiding credit problems, then everything that we don't buy now is seen as a sacrifice, which is a negative.
On the other hand, if we look to the future and say I want to be financially comfortable in the future, which amounts to the same impact, but it's the positive aspect of it; then if I want to be financially secure in the future, then every time that I don't buy something now, I see it as a positive step I am taking towards building my future. And therefore, it becomes much more palatable. That side of it, again, will take care of our fulfillment. Dealing with it on the negatives, really only deals with our satisfaction. Our satisfaction is going to be based on when we do what's reasonably right. Our fulfillment will be based on when we do what is emotionally best. And as a result of that, men never separate the two. They judge everything in terms of satisfaction and fulfillment while they are looking at the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the future, versus the positive and negative aspects of what's going on in the present.
So, for us, we have to separate our satisfaction from our fulfillment, and in fact, whenever we're dealing only with satisfaction, we'll be looking at negatives. And whenever we're dealing with fulfillment, we'll be looking at positives. So, that's what makes women as a breed, appear to be less practical, because a woman who is not justifying, a woman who is just problem solving for her life, and not suffering things that are inappropriate and inefficient for her personally, will not be dealing only with satisfaction, will not be dealing only with reason, but, will be dealing only with fulfillment. Men look at that and say, "Why are they so impractical?" They can't understand why we're riding down the railroad track on only one rail, from their point of view, and the side that's holding reason isn't being used at all.
Well, in fact it doesn't have to be used. In fact, if it is used at all, or just by itself, we'll only be dealing with negatives. And if it's used in conjunction with fulfillment, then we're fighting against ourselves, because we'll always be in eternal conflict saying well this is reasonable, but that side is emotionally fulfilling, and in fact, men cannot separate reason from emotion. They blend the two together. We use one or the other. And in the case of using one or the other, one will appear to be negative, and one will appear to be positive.
Therefore, if we are to find fulfillment, which is what women want most, because that's the internal aspect, as opposed to satisfaction of looking externally, then in that case, we are going to want to ignore the reasonable side of the argument; let it take care of itself and deal with the emotional side of the argument, and feel what is best for our future.
Another thought on this issue, is that the area in which women leave themselves open to problems is that if you are only considering the positive side, if there is a negative consequence, looming in the future, that requires a sacrifice to made now, it's not going to be evaluated at all. In other words, whenever there's something that has no positive aspect to it at all, no good can be seen, or very little, so little in fact, that it would be overlooked when you are trying to determine what is a good thing to strive for in the future. Then if there's this big negative thing, it becomes invisible, because it's too negative, so you don't see it. And as a result of not seeing it, you don't plan for it, because it would require making sacrifices now to avoid a negative thing.
As a result of it, that's why we end up having to rely historically on men to deal with a lot of the practical matters. It's not we're not capable of it, but every time we move into being aware of what's going on negatively, we're turning our mind to the positive. Whenever we look at what will satisfy us, we are shutting our mind to fulfillment. Whenever we're trying to prevent negative things from happening, then we have to be scanning for them with our sonar out there, or our radar, looking for negative things on the horizon. It makes us negatively oriented, and as a result of it, then we avoid all of these pitfalls, but the only good things that happen to us, happen by accident as a by-product of having avoided negatives, and that's not very good for personal fulfillment, and yet in an objective sense, looking for one's survival is a much better trait to look for the negative things.
So, if our purpose only was survival, only objective survival to carry on the species, then we should devote ourselves totally to the negative, and look out for the things that could hurt us, and at that point, or hurt those that would carry on the species - - our children, and then make whatever sacrifices are necessary to prevent that, and we will never be caught unawares by the world. However, we'll also never find fulfillment, except by accident. If we want to be fulfilled, then in that case, we need to have an environment that in a sense takes care of not hurting us. Takes care of protecting us.
That's the function that men have fulfilled throughout history. Because they do not get negative when they see the negative side. They see a balance between the negative and the positive, and so they can adjust things so that they are finding themselves positive fulfillment at the same time that they are aware of the negative things that require them to try and achieve satisfaction. Because of this, nothing sneaks up on them, unawares in the external world, because they are always scanning for the negative as well as the positive, and there won't be anything that won't show up on their radar.
On the other hand, what they cannot do, or cannot see, is they cannot see the value of impractical things that only have meaning for the heart, very easily. Those things happen to them by accident, to us, we can create that just by the way we view our world, ourselves, our environment. And so, that relationship has existed.
As we get into a society that is farther away from survival, then the immediate survival need of having a man to protect you, begins to become less and less important, because there is a government, and there is welfare, and there are medical doctors, and there are counseling offices, and when a problem comes up, it usually doesn't come up immediately, so that it stares you in the face, and threatens your survival. There's a delay factor that society has built in to give a lead time to be able to deal with these problems, and as a result, even when we're not scanning for them, we become aware of them, before they become aware of us. In other words, before the problem actually lands on our doorstep, we are aware it's coming down the street.
Therefore, the need for a man to protect us has become less and less and less, in our civilized society. But, now it's moving into a situation where it becomes more and more and more, because as we move through that period of time, say around the 1950's or so, where survival was not something that was immediate to us, and we could see it coming. But, life was still pretty simple and easy to figure out. Then we were doing pretty good, that was our age. But, right now we're taking society and saying let's move it to a new kind of survival; survival financially, survival politically, survival socially; where you can ruin your entire future by one slip-up.
As a result of that, that's where men are going to excel again is in this complex environment of having to pay a lifelong price for one indiscretion. That kind of thing makes one more and more susceptible to the consequences if one is not scanning for negatives, and as a result men become important again in our lives to handle that, but that is a male response to a society that has gotten so far away from survival that men don't have any reason to be needed by women. They've lost that half, the fulfillment half of their lives no longer needs them, which leaves them unsatisfied. And as a result of that, subconsciously as a collective subconscious, the male species fashions problems for them to solve. So that they create their own justifications built into the way the financial world, and the social world, and the political world operate.
Now, at this point, instead of looking at social suicide or political suicide or financial suicide, which is exactly what happens when you lose your survival capability, we could create a society in which those things were not so binary, in which those things, you could still see them coming, you could still see them looming. But, every time you move towards that opportunity to have an infrastructure that serves as your radar, and can point things out, then the male side of the species is no longer needed as much by the female side of the species.
This is an intrinsic dichotomy in what's best for one, compared to what's best for the other. It's the place in which they agree oppositely. The one in which men see one thing as positive, and the other as negative, and women see the negative as positive, and the positive as negative, from their point of view. This was the one area of paradox, and the one that can never be resolved. All we can do, is try and strike a balance between the two, so that it becomes beneficial to have men in your life, but at the same time it does not become essential to have men in your life, and that is a compromise for us, because we are not having complete independence, but at the same time, we do not have complete reliance either.
And as far as it goes for men that although we don't theoretically need them, instead they find that although they are not completely needed, they are also highly desired, because then it frees us up from having to plug the gap of trying to base that radar on ourselves and deal with the negative side of the equation, and lose track of our own fulfillment, because in that sense we are binary, we can only do one at a time, whereas men are doing both continuously.
So, the only way out of this fix is for each individual to determine if they wish to build a lifestyle in which they don't have to think about the practical side of life at all, and have a man in their life to handle that for them, or highly justified woman, who's going to be thinking only in terms of the negatives, and never find fulfillment, but find satisfaction, but when all is said and done be completely unfulfilled, that would do also, because she's only going to be looking at the negatives.
Whether we want to have that kind of a person in our lives; either a negative person as a woman, or a person who's balanced as a man, but takes care of all of that for us. Or if we want to carve in our society a role in which we pick up the slack, and don't find ourselves completely fulfilled, or if we try to build an infrastructure outside of ourselves that is even more forward looking than the infrastructure society provides, and as a result it provides for us that kind of forward looking radar and we can then give up that role without having an actual physical person taking care of that for us, which
could be like making a lot of money, and putting it into blind trust accounts and things as a woman, or setting up organizations, or having stock in many different companies plus savings account, plus properties someplace, so no matter what the economy does, there's always a certain amount of money coming in, but then remember, unless you have a man in your life looking out for you, you have to trust that the accountants are doing what they should for you. You have to trust that the people who are your business managers, or the head of your companies or whatever, that they are doing what you want them to and acting in your best interest. Because you won't be checking for that and you'll leave yourself open to a blind side, by doing that. So, the only other way is to either take a part of yourself at some point, and still check up and see how things are going, or to have a man there doing it for you.
One way around this is by having a regular check-in point where you have one week a year or perhaps one day a month when you sit down and deal with your satisfactions and the rest of the time deal with your fulfillment. As a result of that you could then say I'm not going to consider this, but it comes up on your calendar once a month, and says today is the day to evaluate how well everybody is meeting your needs, and then you can take them from personal relationships, all the way to your business situations, and look at how well people are meeting your needs, and then make decisions based on satisfaction, which will be kind of a negative day, because you are evaluating is there anything negative out there that I don't like, and what resources to I have to give up to apply to that negative to get rid of it.
That's going to be a negative day essentially, but you'll be very satisfied at the end of it, because you'll have allocated your resources as efficiently as possible to plug all the gaps and solve all the negatives or prevent the negatives. And then, the rest of the days of the month, you can just sit back and be fulfilled, and say now what do I want to go after, and feel good about every step your taking to get there. So, this might be a future in problem solving software again, is to create calendar warnings that are justification alerts and they don't say,
"oh, oh, you're beginning to justify, they just say to keep from justifying too far, to fill in your blind side, at regular intervals, here is a reminder that this kind of thing needs to be checked up about this frequently. Certainly if things change unexpectedly in the middle, you're going to be caught unawares. But, if you have some experience to go on, and you look over the past cycles that have occurred, you can set your evaluation times, so that they are close enough that these kinds of cycles are not at all expected to happen historically before you have a chance to evaluate, using your satisfaction and looking at things in terms of the negatives. That you have a good cushion between when things are expected to occur, and where you put your next warnings.
But again, a justifications calendar, I guess would be the feature, and it would provide regular alarms and alerts at different frequencies because the things that happen in our lives have different wave forms with different frequencies, and as a result of it, if we take them as individual things, we can then determine how often we ought to be altered to various different items. We may decide to move some earlier than we need to, because we may want to group them all together again to have a satisfaction day.
When we evaluate these negatives, so even if it's something as every six weeks, and something else is every 2 months, and something else is every 3 months; if we did it monthly, then it would be too early for the six week thing, too early for the 2 month or 3 month thing, but we get them all done at one time, and wouldn't have to do them again. So, it's being a little over-efficient, but we're only putting a portion of our month, say one day down to dealing with all of these issues.
We can get them all out of the way at once, rather than being reminded this day, and sometimes 3 days in a row, and sometimes 2 days of fulfillment, and then one day of satisfaction, and someday a week with nothing. That irregular schedule is rather erratic and keeps interrupting the peace of our fulfillment, so this would also be something that could be a feature that could auto group the cycles, so that the things you've listed, there will be the lowest common denominator that would allow you to view everything before a complete cycle has occurred, and that would be your one day, when everything would be grouped, and it would remind you all at once, and also indicate when it's normal cycle would be up, so you know how far ahead of the game you are, how overprotective you are of your environment, by viewing it to quickly in succession. All of this could be handled automatically, and would make on heck of a nifty little calendar, definitely now that I'm thinking about it, and this is clarified into a feature. We definitely want to put in that justification calendar as a feature in the original problem solving software.
Remember it will have to have a different form taken for a male justification calendar, versus a female justification calendar, keeping in mind that our users may be highly justified and therefore we'll have to name them differently then male and female because a highly justified woman would find that she would be looking towards the male justification calendar as being the one that had most meaning to her, because she's trying to maintain her negative justifications. So, until she uses problem solving software enough, and gets herself out of those justifications and out of dealing only with the negatives, then she would not find any use in the one that would be called the female justification calendar. So, we need to have two forms, and we could call one the reason justification calendar, and the emotion justification calendar or the satisfaction and fulfillment justification calendars, might be a better name for them.
So, let's line this out, and when this gets typed up, we'll send it off to Mark to try and pull out what he can about this feature and put it into a single description of the item, if I haven't taken care of it myself.
An interesting side note is the effect that when you are doing these different kinds of justifications, what impact that has on those around you. There's a tendency for those who are looking at things on the negative side for women, especially is to be constantly complaining about the way things are when it's nothing that they can change, because they'll be frustrated about the fact that they can't do anything about a negative, and as a result they'll complain and complain and complain.
As a matter of fact, men will do the same thing when they are looking at the negative side of their equation. Women who are completely on the positive side of the equation and men who are dealing with the positive side at the moment, have a tendency to talk about what they are going to do, and wonderful things that are going to happen, before they've actually happened. So, on the negative side, it's generally complaining about existing negative situations that nothing can be done about. The problematic interpersonal relationship on the positive side is to constantly talk about the wonderful things that can happen, might happen, are down the line, that haven't actually occurred yet.
So, it's important for us to remember that if we're going to get out of justifications, or if we're going to be dealing in any given moment at the positive or the negative, is that when we're dealing with the negative side, and this is probably equally good advice for male or female. When we're looking at the negative side and dealing with this is an upcoming consequence or this is a consequence that already exists that I can take steps to get rid of; when you're looking at that side of it, only deal with things that you can actually do something about. And if there's something that you can't either do about it, then cope and coping means not telling everybody about how terrible it is, that is just venting some of the frustration at being inactive, by trying to enlist others in your cause.
The real purpose behind that is to say " things are terrible, I can't do anything about it, maybe you've got an idea is what it really means, or maybe you can lend some support". But, in fact, it simply comes across as complaining. Whereas, the person who is telling about the wonderful thing that's going to happen in the future is actually saying, "look this is appearing on the future, sure it's not certain, but they don't state that part, they just say look at this wonderful thing that's going to happen, isn't that great, not because they want to lord it over anybody else or point out how much better things are for them than for the other person they are talking to, but because they want to share something good that they see happening, so that the other person can experience the joy of it in advance as well.
Now, that's the motivation that drives the positive looking person forward is to be able to experience the joy of having achieved the goal before they actually get there. Meaning that that's why it's a joy to be able to do things that others might see as sacrifices, they do not appear as sacrifices to the forward looking positive individual, because they are essentially saying look at the bricks that I am building that are creating the pathway that will take me to where my goal is. Each time I lay one, I'm closer to the wonderful thing, but I can see it already, and because I see it already, I enjoy it before it's even happened.
In fact, for those kinds of people, you can go through and build this path with all of these bricks and lay them, and by the time you get to the end, if the goal is snatched away from you at the last moment, you can still be almost as happy, because you were able to enjoy it, without it actually happening. In other words, you enjoyed the existence of it, before it actually existed. Therefore, it was just a decision at the last point, whether it would be only a passing state or an on-going process of that goal's existence that you could continue to enjoy farther and farther past the crucial moment of bringing it into inception.
For the negative person, these things might go away all by themselves. At the last moment the unavoidable consequence might completely disappear and evaporate before it actually comes in to plague you. That can happen too. But, instead, the negative looking person is going to be constantly complaining about the situation looking for help, looking for help, and then it may turn out that no help was necessary at all. But, notice that when we're dealing with interpersonal relationships, it's the concept of saying this is too good to keep for myself, I want to share.
Because when you share, it actually makes it better by making the future look even more positive to the person, so everybody can join in it and then something like a breeder-reactor occurs where you start playing against each other, kind of like a laser, back and forth between the mirrors until you finally get to point when it's intensity is increased for each participant, and then there's the negative
person who is trying to get help and by continuing to complain, the benefit of that for the negative looking person is that eventually it spreads out where more and more people are complaining about it and sometimes something that no individual or small group of individuals could handle, will have a large holistic effect by a great number of people becoming involved and it becomes a social movement that changes the unchangeable. These are the benefits of sharing. The problems occur when the negative person tries to share with the positive, or where the positive tries to share with the negative. Very often, we find in our society, because it is a male society, designed by males, is that the fulfillment side is the one that completely eludes them is to be 100% fulfillment. Although they can throw themselves into being 100% satisfaction, and that 100% satisfaction is actually what we see as 100% satisfaction is when you are blending satisfaction and fulfillment.
What happens is the general approach that people except in our western society is either to say well, I've got a balanced life, or gee things are negative. For the people who are saying gee, everything is rosy, they're called optimists and utopians and they are not seen favorably because it's like denying the real consequences that exist that we have to complain about to get more people involved with for a male society perspective. On the other hand, for the individual who is positively minded, and sees things as "I don't see any negative things around me at all" There's no negatives in my life, and they're constantly saying how can I make things better, oh wouldn't that be better? Isn't that joyous to imagine it better, gee I'll take these steps that I need to take to make that better, and every one is a positive step because it leads me towards something positive.
Well, those people sound so unrealistic, and it makes the people who are complaining feel bad, because to be positive is to be desired, as a state, subjectively. However, when one achieves that state, one becomes completely impractical. And by becoming completely impractical, then one is denying the existence of purely practical negative situations that are very real. And that's why there is a difficulty in communication.
For myself personally, I was very positive. I once wanted to have a camp-out in the backyard with some friends, and it started to rain, so I had a sign made up and put it inside that said camp-in, and we did it inside. In my middle adult life I learned to be negative with the way society was going, and now I'm coming back to the positive, and believe me it feels a lot better. I think that's going to be a lot better for both males and females to think of.
November 29, 1994
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
January 7, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
February 3, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
February 11, 1995
NOT YET TRANSCRIBED
Comments