Reflections on Life and Other Ramblings
We cannot control the thoughts and words of others even when we know they aren't telling the entire story, but a partial one that often makes them appear to be blameless in any given situation. We can only hope that one day, they will realize that theirs is not the only tale told and they bear equal responsibility with each person their life touches for what happens between them including their reaction to things delivered by the hand of another. What is the old saying? "There are two sides to every story?"
I would say at least two, but such things vary on the number of people involved just like the sides of geometric figures. For instance, if you draw a simple circle, it has two sides, an inside and an outside or a front and a back. Give the figure depth and it becomes a solid tube shape and has least three sides, front, back ( or top and bottom if you prefer) and a side with no corners or edges.
I bear the responsibility for my own actions, despite the desire a couple of years ago for justice or revenge. Justice and revenge, now, there's an interesting pair of concepts. They are complimentary and, yet, at the same time, contradictory. Both take into account the balancing of scales, but one is generally decided by someone impartial, the other is decided upon by someone directly involved. These days, I tend to keep in mind that to ask for what is fair is not always right and to ask for what is right is not always fair.
I remember a scene from Clash of the Titans when Calabos asks his mother, Thetis, to seek justice on his behalf against Perseus. Thetis, despite having a great love for her son, asks if he really wants justice or revenge. He's angry because he does indeed want revenge; Perseus stole his girl and, to add insult to injury, cut off his hand, which helped prove the answer to a riddle. Myths, whether they are the ones set on paper by Hamilton and Bullfinch or the Hollywoodized versions, have one thing in common. They all have lessons to be learned entwined within the words and/or special effects. I've always thought it interesting that the Greek Pantheon is shown to have human frailties.
I think that I am often naive, despite being in what's termed middle age. I expect truth for truth, yet, I have learned that truth to one is not truth to another. We see and believe what our senses tells us is real therefore it is truth to us. Ten people can be in the same room and witness the same exact event, but each one sees it from their own perspective. Be it a different visual angle or missing details they never saw or didn't wish to see, truth can be relative to who sees/does not see or who hears/does not hear.
It's never wise to take the words of an intermediary as gospel, because such things aren't gospel. Taking things out of context and passing them along as what someone said isn't really passing along what they said. It's what the middle man wants to be heard, be it their intention to do harm or to help, in the end, all there is will be blame to be laid.
Despite our ire or other emotions toward those that creep into our thoughts like thieves in the night, we can only answer for what we've really done or said not what another thinks we did or didn't do or say. I read somewhere once that it often takes two people to hurt you, whoever said something about you and whoever told you it was said. However, that leads back to my previous thoughts on the intentions of the intermediary. Just because someone passes along what was said does not make it completely true. And does anyone have the right to pass on what they did not hear directly from the person in question knowing that it would hurt a fourth party? I don't think so. Why? Because the third person is clueless as to whether or not information was altered.
I think there is a vast difference between this is my direct experience with this person and he said, she said, they all said that about you.
I would say at least two, but such things vary on the number of people involved just like the sides of geometric figures. For instance, if you draw a simple circle, it has two sides, an inside and an outside or a front and a back. Give the figure depth and it becomes a solid tube shape and has least three sides, front, back ( or top and bottom if you prefer) and a side with no corners or edges.
I bear the responsibility for my own actions, despite the desire a couple of years ago for justice or revenge. Justice and revenge, now, there's an interesting pair of concepts. They are complimentary and, yet, at the same time, contradictory. Both take into account the balancing of scales, but one is generally decided by someone impartial, the other is decided upon by someone directly involved. These days, I tend to keep in mind that to ask for what is fair is not always right and to ask for what is right is not always fair.
I remember a scene from Clash of the Titans when Calabos asks his mother, Thetis, to seek justice on his behalf against Perseus. Thetis, despite having a great love for her son, asks if he really wants justice or revenge. He's angry because he does indeed want revenge; Perseus stole his girl and, to add insult to injury, cut off his hand, which helped prove the answer to a riddle. Myths, whether they are the ones set on paper by Hamilton and Bullfinch or the Hollywoodized versions, have one thing in common. They all have lessons to be learned entwined within the words and/or special effects. I've always thought it interesting that the Greek Pantheon is shown to have human frailties.
I think that I am often naive, despite being in what's termed middle age. I expect truth for truth, yet, I have learned that truth to one is not truth to another. We see and believe what our senses tells us is real therefore it is truth to us. Ten people can be in the same room and witness the same exact event, but each one sees it from their own perspective. Be it a different visual angle or missing details they never saw or didn't wish to see, truth can be relative to who sees/does not see or who hears/does not hear.
It's never wise to take the words of an intermediary as gospel, because such things aren't gospel. Taking things out of context and passing them along as what someone said isn't really passing along what they said. It's what the middle man wants to be heard, be it their intention to do harm or to help, in the end, all there is will be blame to be laid.
Despite our ire or other emotions toward those that creep into our thoughts like thieves in the night, we can only answer for what we've really done or said not what another thinks we did or didn't do or say. I read somewhere once that it often takes two people to hurt you, whoever said something about you and whoever told you it was said. However, that leads back to my previous thoughts on the intentions of the intermediary. Just because someone passes along what was said does not make it completely true. And does anyone have the right to pass on what they did not hear directly from the person in question knowing that it would hurt a fourth party? I don't think so. Why? Because the third person is clueless as to whether or not information was altered.
I think there is a vast difference between this is my direct experience with this person and he said, she said, they all said that about you.