It is a weird feeling. I am feeling it, I keep feeling it. No words, I find can explain this feeling. How do I convey this feeling, that I am having? I do want to convey the feeling, but perhaps not at the expense of you feeling the feeling.
I wonder, why is it so easy for some to talk at length. I seem to have lost the art of--or rather, perhaps I never had it, to begin with--talking. I make symbols through sound, that I feel convey my understanding of the world. However, I am skeptical that my understanding ever gets transferred. Instead, I might be deceiving myself--as my noise symbols through sound, made when I talk, or any other symbol of communication, like letters in this blog post, are to influence your actions to my need or facilitate myself.
I cannot understand somebody else's mind in totality.
I cannot convey myself or my mind, the real me, in totality.
However, even then I have a feeling that my understanding is transferred, perhaps because the bodily actions I would do, as a result of the understanding or during the initial transferring of the understanding, or at least my expectations of the resulting actions from the understanding, (all are my word-action relationship understand) correspond to your actions,
Therefore,I feel I have transferred the understanding.
Perhaps, I or anyone does not need to understand a person in totality. Perhaps, just knowing a few things may be enough to convey an understanding. If that is true, then I can know about you by just looking at your clothes. Perhaps there is a little grain of truth, but may be if I know a few things about or hear you talk about a specific topic, I would know your understanding. However, it does not sound right in the sense, that I am making one assumption, Your understanding of the individual words and the collective usage of the words will develop the same understanding in me. Which cannot be proved or disproved. What can be proved or disproved is that I will be able to make a set of actions potentially ascribable to you, based on what you said. These set of actions will come from the set of actions I will ascribe to the understanding I developed as a result of your talk.
But, the set of actions I ascribe to the understanding, may be different to the set of actions you would ascribe. Plus, we both may have the exactly same set of actions, yet different understandings. However, for us, as long as the physical manifestation in the form of actions of your understanding match our understanding of a topic, time, religion, object, abstract, simple, complex, or any other conveyable symbol, we utilize to carry out in our lives--the understanding has been conveyed. That is it. As long as we continue to get the actions we like or accept, matched with the same words we would to describe them, the understanding has been conveyed. As soon as an action is carried out, which you thought entailed the understand, but we never thought before, change occurs.
The mental state, the picture behind the eyes or words, something that does not affect me, is rendered not only unimportant. But, in fact, this real understanding, per se, the understanding of self in totality, that every human has of the self, is rendered so unimportant (or perhaps taken for granted) that it is never even attempted to be communicated. Perhaps, it is being communicated. However, we do not concern about this mental state, the self in totality, until out-lier actions occur or our understanding of the words-action relationship is disturbed.
If you continue to play along, say the things I am comfortable with, and continue to do things that at least do not effect me, in any negative manner to me, continuing according to my word-action relationship understanding, I will not even consider your mental state--assuming that the word-action relationship understanding is mutual for both of us. I will not attempt to look into your self in totality because your communication with me is benefiting me since it matches my word-action relationship expectation.
Nevertheless, it is a sorry state. I should actively be letting you define the words, actions, separately, however you like, without any regard for words-action relationship. Even though by doing so, I might not understand you at all, but this would be a step towards understanding your self in totality.
In such a case, where I am not binding you with a word-action relationship understanding, as I said, I might not understand you, but on the flip side, if I do understand you, it would be you in totality. Your view of the world.
I am not even sure if any of this makes sense. Nevertheless, it is, what it is. I rest my mental mind.
I wonder, why is it so easy for some to talk at length. I seem to have lost the art of--or rather, perhaps I never had it, to begin with--talking. I make symbols through sound, that I feel convey my understanding of the world. However, I am skeptical that my understanding ever gets transferred. Instead, I might be deceiving myself--as my noise symbols through sound, made when I talk, or any other symbol of communication, like letters in this blog post, are to influence your actions to my need or facilitate myself.
I cannot understand somebody else's mind in totality.
I cannot convey myself or my mind, the real me, in totality.
However, even then I have a feeling that my understanding is transferred, perhaps because the bodily actions I would do, as a result of the understanding or during the initial transferring of the understanding, or at least my expectations of the resulting actions from the understanding, (all are my word-action relationship understand) correspond to your actions,
Therefore,I feel I have transferred the understanding.
Perhaps, I or anyone does not need to understand a person in totality. Perhaps, just knowing a few things may be enough to convey an understanding. If that is true, then I can know about you by just looking at your clothes. Perhaps there is a little grain of truth, but may be if I know a few things about or hear you talk about a specific topic, I would know your understanding. However, it does not sound right in the sense, that I am making one assumption, Your understanding of the individual words and the collective usage of the words will develop the same understanding in me. Which cannot be proved or disproved. What can be proved or disproved is that I will be able to make a set of actions potentially ascribable to you, based on what you said. These set of actions will come from the set of actions I will ascribe to the understanding I developed as a result of your talk.
But, the set of actions I ascribe to the understanding, may be different to the set of actions you would ascribe. Plus, we both may have the exactly same set of actions, yet different understandings. However, for us, as long as the physical manifestation in the form of actions of your understanding match our understanding of a topic, time, religion, object, abstract, simple, complex, or any other conveyable symbol, we utilize to carry out in our lives--the understanding has been conveyed. That is it. As long as we continue to get the actions we like or accept, matched with the same words we would to describe them, the understanding has been conveyed. As soon as an action is carried out, which you thought entailed the understand, but we never thought before, change occurs.
The mental state, the picture behind the eyes or words, something that does not affect me, is rendered not only unimportant. But, in fact, this real understanding, per se, the understanding of self in totality, that every human has of the self, is rendered so unimportant (or perhaps taken for granted) that it is never even attempted to be communicated. Perhaps, it is being communicated. However, we do not concern about this mental state, the self in totality, until out-lier actions occur or our understanding of the words-action relationship is disturbed.
If you continue to play along, say the things I am comfortable with, and continue to do things that at least do not effect me, in any negative manner to me, continuing according to my word-action relationship understanding, I will not even consider your mental state--assuming that the word-action relationship understanding is mutual for both of us. I will not attempt to look into your self in totality because your communication with me is benefiting me since it matches my word-action relationship expectation.
Nevertheless, it is a sorry state. I should actively be letting you define the words, actions, separately, however you like, without any regard for words-action relationship. Even though by doing so, I might not understand you at all, but this would be a step towards understanding your self in totality.
In such a case, where I am not binding you with a word-action relationship understanding, as I said, I might not understand you, but on the flip side, if I do understand you, it would be you in totality. Your view of the world.
I am not even sure if any of this makes sense. Nevertheless, it is, what it is. I rest my mental mind.
