Originally Posted by aloneagainor
Group-think vs. individual thought. To engage and participate, or to detach and observe. Certainly we are all a product of the collective that is humanity. Interconnected and interdependent for everything from the food we eat to the work we do to the intracacies of language and culture and technology...
I wonder, however, to what extent one needs to interact, to directly involve oneself with others, for approval, for confirmation, for support, for love.
I have this idea that the extent of interaction (based on the human being as a social species) is a direct result of the satisfaction one will have within their own individual experience and furthermore, influence upon the group.
The human being has shown itself to be unlike any other animal based on its emotional capacity. (among other things) In regard to emotions, they are a driving force that deems the human species depedant on itself. A single persons need for approval has its very own identity and explanation. This holds true for everyone as some need approval more than others. Regardless, as a whole, approval becomes an important consideration across the board based on the fact that it must take place, it is going to take place, the human existence (due to emotional need) requires or forces it to be sought after. The same for confirmation and support. Interestingly enough, the human being is unique in its operation. As it does function independently within a dependent group. So this means that individuals can achieve approval through their own function, which seems to be the healthiest way. When a person is emotionally capable or emotionally intelligent shall I say, they often approve of themselves and find themselves in no need of outside approval...but regardless, approval it still necessary to the human being. As a matter of fact, this individual, or self-approval, seems to be the most effective way at achieving approval. If it exists, then outside approval (from the group) would naturally be granted by default. To have approval from the group and not ones self, would suggest it is not genuine and basically non existent.
What this consideration implies in terms of interaction is 1) it acknowledges the necessity of it based on human emotion. 2) By looking around the world, we can easily see that the human being fails to understand the importance of properly identifying its needs and orchestrating the best methods to achieving them. Everyhting is out of order, which is also a result of the emotions, I suspect. When fear has presendence over compassion, the wrong needs will be met. When greed has presedence over humility, the snowball effect is horrific. And on and on and on. When our own individual needs are not properly being met, it is only reasonable that the groups needs will not be met, which creates negative interaction. I mean, this is a mess.
When I try to determine a reason for the madness, I wonder if our emotions simply have not evolved enough as a species. Aloneagainor, pardon me if I ran a little too far and in the wrong direction with what you were saying.
Originally Posted by Aloneagainor
Emotions! I get so stuck on this point of the distorting factor of emotions. How emotions tell us we need other people, and emotions without understanding demand that we need people to behave in a certain way in order for us to be happy/ content/ fulfilled. Is that emotional dependency on the belief that we need to be part of the group beneficial, or harmful, to being an independent thinking being? Or is that what keeps a person from achieving inner peace, preventing one from fully exploring, for inhibitions and fear of disapproval that might distance one from the group. Perhaps group think/ need for belonging and acceptance are the very factors that create feelings of loneliness and unworthiness and disapproval, the "not good enoughs" that weigh people down.
Granted, my perspective is biased as I have been isolating, discounting emotions, and wondering why I'd want to subject myself to being influenced (and potentially hurt or otherwise controlled) directly by others, when I can just observe from the sidelines and pursue the path that so interests me, without getting directly involved with others at all.
While taking into consideration what I'm doing here in engaging:
Your paragraph up there regarding the distorting factor of emotions has a lot of sub topics in it. For the sake of efficiency, I will try to generalize. Basically
it seems there is a concern of sacrifice at the hand of emotional demands that are set forth by the group. Is that right? I hope so. I am getting that you don't agree that the collective idea(s) surrounding emotions and their demands, benefit you as an individual.
The concern I have would be how you may possibly be regarding the importance of emotions. It is essential to understand precisely how ones own emotions are stimulated. If a person can attempt to step out of themself (being ridiculously honest that it'll make you puke) and examine how as many emotions as they can possibly consider are triggered, and how that effects another and another...doing this completely unemotional as capable, all biasness' aside. Maybe, one can see what is going on. Maybe one can see how and/or why they may feel the need to have or avoid something, for instance, interaction within the group. If a person can truly identify how their emotions function and how they are capable of aligning with their cognitive processes, a person may find themselves in a position where they can understand their role in the big scheme of things. Through the understanding of the way emotions motivate us individually, we begin to understand precisely why we either are efficient in our expeiences or we get caught up in insanity. It seems an order must be identified. Emotions have to be identified. They have to be regarded properly so the can be treated properly. By goodness, they are it, they are the very thing that determines the quality of life. But, it is so important to understand what we are dealing with. I highly suggest decisions are never made based only on how you feel. It may lead one to feeling worse and then spending a bunch of time trying to figure out how to fix it. By making decisions based on rationality and reason, you know, what makes sense, usually we end up with the best possible feeling. This provides efficiency.
Wow. I got carried away. I'm sorry. I did'nt mean to go too far. OOOOPS! Listen to me, my emotions (which give breath to my insecurities) are telling me to apologize and seek the groups forgiveness (approval). No apologies, but I ask you to pardon me out of respect for the group.
In addition, I am no expert on emotions, hell, I'm a freakin' recovering drug addict who was lead around on a leash being pulled by my emotions. Maybe that experience provides me a small amount of credibility.
You guys are the best. And Aloneagainor....Thank you.