These days I am close to my two young friends who have had a disagreement. Carry two names entirely fictitious, of course, because what interests me is not to focus on the story itself, rather the way to deal with it.
Miriam was the idea of \u200b\u200binvolving his friend Paul in a small project. The proposal, Paul found himself crowded out and contact me for advice. The first thing I thought, and I said, is that in fact the couple were stocked in a strange way, because the two, despite knowing for years, have always had difficulty communicating with each other. However, I felt that there was nothing that a little 'patience and commitment (and perhaps a little' help) could not be resolved. My point of view-from "outside" - was that the proposal seemed interesting, although difficult to achieve. So I recommend Paul to think first of whether the project's interest, then to deal with on this basis, the problems with Miriam.
few days later I hear also Miriam. She explains the story from their point of view and tells me that it does nothing. At this point, wondering what had gone before to be addressing Paul, then to give up so fast: the answer that gives me start to meditate.
Miriam - I thought of Paul, because I thought we compensate, but now that I have not responded so I mean to continue the project with him.
Paul - In the end I said no, because I had proposed in a manner not satisfactory, then gave me answers that made me give up.
at first seem reasonable answers, weighted according to the difficulties of communication. However, the tone was bitter, the sting ... almost offended! As if the responsibility for the failure resided exclusively in the attitude of the other, and the reasons were not anything personal. From the outside you could take a few nuances: on the one hand Miriam has been conducting a purely theoretical point of view (similar to mine, except that she was "internal"), on the other Paul responded, without giving the ' impression to choose for themselves.
So, I asked Miriam if her motivation was sufficient to overcome the difficulties with-prevedibilissime-Paul, Paul and Miriam whether the proposed interest to him, apart from the difficulties of communication. In any case, I received a reply: Believe it or not, in the end I could not tell if the project that would involve really wanted to follow them. Although almost economically " weighed the difficulties, in fact, none of them had really made a budget with itself and with its arguments. Probably, there was an epilogue that was the only possible, but I wonder: what has driven the decision?
years of ideologies and utopias, which gave guidance were the great dreams of the masses. When ideologies have collapsed and left surviving any plans to guide personal choices. The basis for judging a project, however, is different from that for an ideal: the project is expected to be real and credible. Since the project is linked to its proponents, the focus has slowly shifted from the idea to people. As I heard at a recent seminar on communication in the Catholic Church, in fact, the values \u200b\u200bof sincerity and fidelity to oneself driving choices by only fifteen years, while first loyalty to an ideal stepping over that.
It is perceived, then, during the '90s, a shift ineffable utopia, the real person, mail suddenly at center stage. Someone started talking about domination of relativism and tried to fix it, patching old ideals without worrying if indeed correspond to popular sentiment, without grasping, then, nor teach the importance of the individual as the center of gravity and making the twenty-first century. This lack of "education for individuality", has brought deep loss, to the point that you do not even have the basics to make small choices: the reaction of others becomes the only lifeline concrete, tangible. As has happened to Paul and Miriam.
is the definitive dismantling of the individual. Being understood as a self (I do not care so much because of what I want is impossible or too tiring), is intended as another (which only becomes my mirror or my alibi).
The economic crisis of this era, reflects the social distress which he poured in: a little money do not prevent people to survive (at least in the West), but greatly reduce the basis for investing in the future. A sociological level, the sentiment is similar: first to continue a project, regardless of desires and aspirations, assessing whether there is support from the outside, then proceed accordingly, but without choosing. The problem is that now feels strong lack of courageous decisions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment