More on Want vs. Need
I've gone back and read to myself my own writings on the subject, initially, because I needed the reminder, and because I've learned more.
First of all, I regularly declare that I would rather be wanted than needed. I already explained that in the post I linked above.
To elaborate on the observation that "need is not personal", I have come to realize that some folks don't feel this way. What if you feel you need not just a particular resource, but for that resource to come from a particular place or person? The problem is that's a trap. That place or person may not actually have that resource available to you? You can't get copper out of a silver mine, no matter how much you like the silver mine. So after all that effort the silver mine is torn up, and you still need copper. Now what?
To me, if I have attached specific identities to need, I have combined "need" and "want" (and just to complicate things, a higher category I'll call "preference".)
I need food. I want pizza. I prefer Oregano's.
I need sleep. I want a bed. I prefer my own.
I need clothing. I want a green dress. I prefer for lynthia to sew me one.
To me, objects (food, shelter, air, etc.) and certain concepts (freedom, self-esteem, etc.) can be necessary, but no particular source or method is functionally irreplaceable. There is always another way, whether or not I can see it.
There's also the question of "needed for what?"
For example:
I need food to live.
I need freedom to be happy.
I need emotional support to stay sane.
I need an internet connection to communicate.
To return to the previous concept:
I can eat food from grocery stores, restaurants, friends' houses, a garden, gathered from the wild, etc. depending on my resources.
If I don't have enough freedom, I can work to acquire more in various ways - get a job, live alone, vote for better candidates, join political protests, move to a different country, join a militia, etc. (Depending on just how not-free I am, I may need to choose between "live free or die".)
If I'm upset and my Mom is busy, I can call my sister or dad. If they're busy, I have friends. If friends are unavailable, I can write in my LJ. If that's not enough I can call a hotline, etc.
If Comcast doesn't have broadband in my area, I can look into AT&T DSL. If that doesn't work, I can try dialup. If that doesn't work, I can borrow a friend's computer for a while, visit 'net cafes, or get a Library account.
I'm sure I've belabored my point quite enough. The real question is, how does a person who doesn't already know how to look for options outside their known resources learn how to think outside the box? How does a person who combines their need for a resource with their attachment to a particular source learn to let go of the source without giving up on the resource?
And the unfortunate answer is that I simply don't know.
--Ember--
First of all, I regularly declare that I would rather be wanted than needed. I already explained that in the post I linked above.
To elaborate on the observation that "need is not personal", I have come to realize that some folks don't feel this way. What if you feel you need not just a particular resource, but for that resource to come from a particular place or person? The problem is that's a trap. That place or person may not actually have that resource available to you? You can't get copper out of a silver mine, no matter how much you like the silver mine. So after all that effort the silver mine is torn up, and you still need copper. Now what?
To me, if I have attached specific identities to need, I have combined "need" and "want" (and just to complicate things, a higher category I'll call "preference".)
I need food. I want pizza. I prefer Oregano's.
I need sleep. I want a bed. I prefer my own.
I need clothing. I want a green dress. I prefer for lynthia to sew me one.
To me, objects (food, shelter, air, etc.) and certain concepts (freedom, self-esteem, etc.) can be necessary, but no particular source or method is functionally irreplaceable. There is always another way, whether or not I can see it.
There's also the question of "needed for what?"
For example:
I need food to live.
I need freedom to be happy.
I need emotional support to stay sane.
I need an internet connection to communicate.
To return to the previous concept:
I can eat food from grocery stores, restaurants, friends' houses, a garden, gathered from the wild, etc. depending on my resources.
If I don't have enough freedom, I can work to acquire more in various ways - get a job, live alone, vote for better candidates, join political protests, move to a different country, join a militia, etc. (Depending on just how not-free I am, I may need to choose between "live free or die".)
If I'm upset and my Mom is busy, I can call my sister or dad. If they're busy, I have friends. If friends are unavailable, I can write in my LJ. If that's not enough I can call a hotline, etc.
If Comcast doesn't have broadband in my area, I can look into AT&T DSL. If that doesn't work, I can try dialup. If that doesn't work, I can borrow a friend's computer for a while, visit 'net cafes, or get a Library account.
I'm sure I've belabored my point quite enough. The real question is, how does a person who doesn't already know how to look for options outside their known resources learn how to think outside the box? How does a person who combines their need for a resource with their attachment to a particular source learn to let go of the source without giving up on the resource?
And the unfortunate answer is that I simply don't know.
--Ember--