Tags

, , , , , ,

It is a matter of fact, however conflicting, that your personality is identified by the number of people who are aware of your existence rather than the number of attributes attained by you. This leads to the subjective nature of your existence that which is ironic in nature at any particular given time. What I meant to say is all about the description of your existence in one person’s mind, how is it identified, how often does it transform, and what does it exactly mean. The core thing behind this entire dilemma is the perception and the inconsistency of mind. The inconsistency here refers to the tendency of the mind to reach at one solution by mean of the easier and the faster way to satisfy itself. More confusion occurs when the similar problem arrives at the different space-time combination where everything is eternally existent except that particular temporary idea or situation of the occurrence of the problem. In fact, the problem is also the same but the mind interprets it in different several ways in its different occurrences because of its inherent tendency. This tendency, henceforth, leads to more confusion and it corrupts the short-term effectiveness of one’s mind. Sometimes, these generic consequences and evidences get interpreted as the most effective way of analyzing things, however this is utter foolish in nature.

The perception is one thing that contributes heavily in this entire game plan. For example, a particular person knows you but that doesn’t mean that your existence will be identified by one particular absolute attribute or a group of consistent factors. You will be identified by the person by the several processes of the heuristics carried by the mind of that particular person and it is certainly not necessary that you always fall at any given point within the network of that heuristic knowledge. The person takes several references to satisfy the logic by using the vague understanding of fact and the knowledge gathered by the mean of heuristics. The point is that if the person tends to identify your absolute means, then, at the same time, why the person doesn’t want to identify your existence and get aware of the real facets and facts. Your existence is no way relative to any other idea or object. In similar ways, the identification of your existence by any functioning system is also not relative or referential. The real-time variables always intend to diminish the absolute nature of any truth and the human psychology plays a mystic role in capturing and elaborating those variables. Talking about the variables, they are not usually objective or self-descriptive in nature, rather they are some sort of mixture of representation of your instincts that shouldn’t be taken as the direct references of those instincts. These variables take form after combining the instinct or your inclusive factors, the immediate environment, and the object that acts as a mirror for those factors in that given environment. To be precise, that object is the person who puts the final remarks for that variable and grabs all the particulars of that variable. The variable is then analyzed as a direct instance of you being an object. After that the real-time variable is gathered by that person, the person’s mind starts the operation in its functional system by picking all its inherent direct and indirect knowledge that can be related with the attributes of that variable by any mean. Surprising enough, the system intends not to connect to any real-time factor that can contribute in reaching a perfect consequential result. It is very orthodox in nature and the proof and consistency of used knowledge can be put under a question. And after the system produces the result, though it satisfies the producer or the person who is performing this entire process, it puts a big-time confusion in your mind and you start wondering about your own personality and attributes.

There can be two, or maybe more, things that may occur in the second person’s mind. First, the mind has inhabited itself for that sort of operation and it can never emerge beyond its own comfort zone, as I said above. Second, the person’s whole system has generated an energy that persuades the person’s mind not to spend a bunch of required effort to produce dynamic processes and logical and far more real consequences. In laymen’s language, the second person doesn’t give a damn to understand you and never bother about your existence and your relation with that person’s existence. So, why does this process occur in the mind of that person? This is because the person is also conflicting in nature and when she doesn’t make any true effort to spend by your mean, at the same time, she also needs to satisfy her own logical needs. Therefore, she chooses the easier and faster way. As a result, what should you gather from whole process? As I think, you also should not bother about any consequences that are reached by someone else’s mind that all depends on the inconsistency of the mind and the perception of that person. You can’t help bringing consistency in her mind and can never capture the true nature of the perception and the related reaction. Well, this result can help producing a rather toxic reaction in your own mind where you repeat the previous operation with your own knowledge base. The second consequence can be that you also intend to get satisfied by that result provided that the result somehow meets your expectation or your own self perceptions. The second consequence may seems fruitful to you at times, but, truth be told, both reaction shouldn’t be carried away by you. It is something like perception of someone else is pushing its protocols to control your nature and originality and all of a sudden, your actions start denying your own existence. In case, if this action continues and repeat itself several times, you stop being referred as a truly living human by the protocols of the truth and the universe. It’s like squashing yourself in a tinier object or a instance that signifies a mockery.

The perception point, if used in accordance and coordination with the common senses and the consciousness, can be a very powerful theory to demystify the hidden truth of the universe and can immensely help to build a far more robust knowledge base. Well, I am talking about something very objective in character, but some associate tools used here are quite a bit collaborative in nature as well. Yes, I am referring to the use of common senses here. Again, this collaboration can be productive and destructive also, depending on the coordination between all the senses and objectivity of the usages. Common Sense is far beyond its defined range. What we call/see “common sense” is the outcome of our learning and experiences and the tendency of the nature to push us towards it. When we talk about common sense, we talk about intersecting the subsets of all our senses altogether. The optimum result occurs only when all of our senses function properly and consciously. And most of the times, when we seem to apply the common sense, we hardly employ all/even half of our senses, rather we take references from the data stored in our minds that is again referenced from several sources(mostly external). Total consciousness is a primitive prerequisite to produce and use common sense. I am afraid that we rarely use our common sense in our lives, forget the day-2-day activities. That’s why, perhaps, I usually prefer to refer common sense as a very uncommon thing in the living world. It has to be understood while regulating the application of the theory of the perception point. Alas, I sometimes realize that why the mystic forces of our existence, like the soul or the heart, plays significant roles in our lives. They somehow don’t satisfy the reasoning of our minds, but at the same time, our reasoning finds it too difficult to demystify these forces. So, perhaps, you shall better be proceeding with the reasoning and mysteries both until one of them starts controlling others existence. In the meanwhile, though you may not assure about the 100% functioning of you perception point, you should try your best to, or better say you must, not live according to others perceptions. In fact, how can one inconsistent operation help some other perception to become truly consistent? This is very simple and if it does satisfy someone’s mind, then the mind should also try to get rid of all those vague ideas and orthodox behaviors. Maybe, at one point of your life, you shall be able to control all the objects that are perceptive in nature.

Painting source: www.shubnamgill.com