After writing that piece about what bothers us most in others I thought it far too narrow an explanation of what I was trying to get at, and now returning to this thread 15 hours later see it was. But also that it was quite thoroughly investigated and my point was eventually addressed. Essentially,
Originally Posted by Brigid
I don't think it is a black and white thing, I definitely look within these days when I find an annoying behaviour and try to be honest with myself ... I sometimes find it. But that is good, once found and recognised I can change it, or accept it within myself...Changing / accepting it increases my tolerance and patience for others.
And once understood within oneself, that annoyance no longer has power to affect us personally. Because we understand it, we're not obliviously/ subconsciously bound to it (reacting without understanding). We can objectively see it for what it is, what causes it, how it affects our own self and others. A lot of the frustration dissipates through such awareness.
Ayn Rand! I read ALL her work in its entirety in my mid-20's. Her writing had more profound effect on my thinking, of waking me up to the power of the individual, than any other author/ teacher/ instruction. I had to go back through my volumes of handwriting/ typewriter notes (pre-computer days!) for this. If I may quote. From
The Fountainhead:
"
The basic need of the creator is independence. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator all relations with men are secondary.
The basic need of the second-hander is to secure his ties with men in order to be fed. He places relations first. He declares than man exists in order to serve others. He preaches altruism. Altruism is the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self. No man can live for another. He cannot share his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used altruism as a weapon of exploitation and reversed the base of mankind's moral principles. Men have been taught every precept that destroys the creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virute.
The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality--the man who lives to serve others--is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit?
"In all proper relationships there is no sacrifice of anyone to anyone. Men exchange their work by free, mutual consdent to mutual advantage when their personal interest agree and they both desire the exchange. If they do not desire it, they are not forced to deal with eachother. They seek further. This is the only possible form of relationship betweeen equals. Anything else is a relation of slave to master, or victim to executioner."
This written before her pinnacle tome
Atlas Shrugged. Who is John Galt? The individual within.