This is what’s happening with Christians who have a too literal interpretation of the bible in today’s world, isn’t it? The stories that your god allegedly inspired people to write in the bible are clouding their perception and making it difficult for them to judge fact from fiction. Your god did this to them. He was like a parent who deliberately told their children stuff that was not true and now that the children have grown up, they’re reluctant to behold the truth because knowing the truth means that they have to admit their parents lied to them.
But maybe your god had a motive for doing this to people; maybe there is some potential benefit that I can’t see and that can arise from perceiving the world with clouded judgment which arises from having a too literal interpretation of the bible?Rational Christians: what motive would your god have to give people false bible stories that cloud perception?
So you mean that humans didn't originate from a pile of dirt and a rib, the Earth wasn't made in 6 days, there wasn't a man who gathered two of all the species on an arc to survive a great flood, so on and so forth? You've just rocked my world.Rational Christians: what motive would your god have to give people false bible stories that cloud perception?
Literal interpretation of the Bible is a very modern invention. Traditionally, Catholics, Lutherans, Anglicans (well most Anglicans), and the Eastern Orthodoxy all reject literal interpretation. Im guessing you knew this though.
Frankly, I don't understand how someone can say that the Bible should be taken literally without reading it in Hebrew and Greek. But thats one of the many reasons why I am Catholic.
Even if God channeled the Bbl directly to ppl , the humans would screw it up, get half of it wrong, and add their own opinions,not to mention translation and retelling losses and distortions.
Then again, maybe the stories are all true and God is real. So then Christians would be the only ones with the right perspective, and doubters would be reluctant to behold the truth.
In answer to your first question, I have never sought for an motive, nor was it an questionfor me. For we have a choice to do or not,
Because you're assuming God wrote the bible - He didn't, human beings did. As far as these people being ';inspired'; well, that's a very vague term. Our own psyches ';inspire'; us.
And people who admit this give up religion eventually.
rational Christians? lol
I like you Desiree
None. That's how we know the Bible is true.
1) Rational Christians: what motive would your god have to give people false bible stories that cloud perception?
I can't think of any. I'll bet that you can't, either.
2) This is what’s happening with Christians who have a too literal interpretation of the bible in today’s world, isn’t it?
No - that does not describe the same situation at all.
3) The stories that your god allegedly inspired people to write in the bible are clouding their perception and making it difficult for them to judge fact from fiction.
Who told you so, and why did you believe them? It seems to me that you are naively adopting a belief that has no evidence to support it. It certainly is an odd religion that you have.
4) Your god did this to them. He was like a parent who deliberately told their children stuff that was not true and now that the children have grown up, they’re reluctant to behold the truth because knowing the truth means that they have to admit their parents lied to them.
Ummm...no. But please feel free to offer evidence to support **your** ';stuff that was not true';...
Jim, http://www.christianwebprogramming.com/b…
if God didn't say what He meant, then why didn't He mean what He said? isn't God able to do that?
you're a fool and im willing to call you on it. you say i am irrational, though i accept the belief in God on a rational premise, that He is able, even able to perform miracles in the ancient past... do you think you're the first to discount them? the very people following Jesus had their fill of miracles yet when He began speaking of Lordship and servitude they left Him by the droves. God is able, nothing is too hard for Him, the universe dripped from His fingers and nations were formed from His breath, they'll be judged by the same. He is even able to pass a perfect and viable promise through the hands of sinful mankind, though they trash it, they mock it, they ridicule it to near death and even ignore it. but God made a promise, His day is coming and when He speaks who will stand up and call Him a liar?
';We have also a MORE SURE (than their eyewitness testimony) word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
KNOWING this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
don't try to say God's word doesn't mean what it says, it is it's own interpretation. don't make up something it isn't saying, it isn't allegorical nor symbolic - solely. every miraculous event became a parable of wisdom, and every parable is a miracle of understanding. the way one must read the Bible is to ask what it meant then, what it means to me personally and how do i apply it? and in that threefold cord you have the Spirit of God speaking a more sure word, the word that transcends human thought and human flaw and human teaching and human misunderstanding, but pierces joint and marrow, dividing the soul and establishing in the heart.
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Perception checking is a type of metacommunication. TRUE OR FALSE?
False.
To me, perception checking is an internal process, rather than any type of communication with another person.
To me, perception checking is an internal process, rather than any type of communication with another person.
Mixed messages, false hope, whatever you perception is towards this question?
So my concern is this: Have any of you felt like someone has given you false hope? Or told you something that they have flipped flopped on? I use to like this girl who is far away from me. Said she hated long distance relationships, but said if I lived near her things would be different. Now, she has a boyfriend, who is far away from her, and is in a long distance relationship now, even though she said she hated them.
Pretty much assume she wasn't interested in me with being in a long distance relationship, but has anyone felt broken for someone giving you mixed messages or false hope that you believed could be possible? Or just wish they were given a chance to prove themselves? Am moving on from her, but just hate it when people flip flop or give you false hope and such. Know the title might not sound correct with what I'm explaining or everything. just sounds cluttered with what I'm asking, but this is what just popped in my head. Apologize if it is confusingMixed messages, false hope, whatever you perception is towards this question?
yea i totally get what you mean..theres this guy ive liked since the summer and weve hang out alot whenever he can but he tends to give me alot of mixed signals..i feel like he likes me but at the same time doesnt want an actual relationship so then im confused..whats up wih him..?..but yea i get you..dont wry hun theres someone out there that will like you for you...
Pretty much assume she wasn't interested in me with being in a long distance relationship, but has anyone felt broken for someone giving you mixed messages or false hope that you believed could be possible? Or just wish they were given a chance to prove themselves? Am moving on from her, but just hate it when people flip flop or give you false hope and such. Know the title might not sound correct with what I'm explaining or everything. just sounds cluttered with what I'm asking, but this is what just popped in my head. Apologize if it is confusingMixed messages, false hope, whatever you perception is towards this question?
yea i totally get what you mean..theres this guy ive liked since the summer and weve hang out alot whenever he can but he tends to give me alot of mixed signals..i feel like he likes me but at the same time doesnt want an actual relationship so then im confused..whats up wih him..?..but yea i get you..dont wry hun theres someone out there that will like you for you...
Perception=Reality True / False ? Why?
An individual's reality is based primarily on their perception.
So, no. The answer is False.
What we, as individuals, see as the 'real world' is based on how we view things - our perception - and those impressions are then filtered through our lives experience thereby lending them a frame of 'reality'.Perception=Reality True / False ? Why?
False. THe definition of perception by nature means a skewed version of reality. What we see is not what is real.
Best example if when you fall in love. You perceive an individual to be different than they are initially, you see all the positives and do not see the flaws, this skews your perception. In the end if a relationship fails, you ask yourself why? In reality it is only because your perception or that of your partner was erred.dry skin
So, no. The answer is False.
What we, as individuals, see as the 'real world' is based on how we view things - our perception - and those impressions are then filtered through our lives experience thereby lending them a frame of 'reality'.Perception=Reality True / False ? Why?
False. THe definition of perception by nature means a skewed version of reality. What we see is not what is real.
Best example if when you fall in love. You perceive an individual to be different than they are initially, you see all the positives and do not see the flaws, this skews your perception. In the end if a relationship fails, you ask yourself why? In reality it is only because your perception or that of your partner was erred.
True or False: Pain is all perception.?
Explain your reasoning please.True or False: Pain is all perception.?
Lets break it down.
Perception refers to all senses, and conscious conceptualization.
Pain exists both in the senses and in the mind.
Psychological pain can be very different and separate from the physical, though it usually results from traumatic experience involving pain.
I can think of no instance where pain falls outside of perception.
Therefor I say TRUE.
Now I think you are looking for truth in the idea that you can control pain. I have first hand experience with having mental power over both physical pain and illness. Pain is just a signal to inform you that you shouldn't be doing that. It serves no purpose to the functionality of your body's operation, and so can be turned off, like a warning alarm. Your body can produce a chemical into the nerve synapse that ';fills'; the pain receptor just like aspirin does. You just have to learn how to use these tools.
If the pain is severe because of a major injury, then this will require a lot more energy to maintain a necessary mindset.
If you do not produce enough energy by decreased diet and activity, then it will become increasingly difficult to control pain.
On another note. If you think of emotional pain caused by jealousy, or deceit... well then this too can be a matter of perception because to be jealous you must think someone belonged to you prior to being ';taken.'; Too feel hurt by someone else's actions can also be resolved by a simple change of perception. This is what forgiveness is all about.
Each situation is unique though and would need to be addressed accordingly.True or False: Pain is all perception.?
True. Pain is perceived just like feeling pleasant is perceived. The part that varies is how to what the degree of pain is. Some people react incredibly outrageous to say a beesting. Their perception of pain is high. To others when they get stung they say ';ouch, or sh**'; not as bad in this case. Their perception of pain is mild.
no, the reason different people feel pain at different levels is because some have a higher or lower pain tolerance. for example my husband has a high pain tolerance so he thinks everyone should. but my son and i have a low pain tolerance and everything hurts us more. it's just the way we are.
true. well said by michele!
FALSE. I have been in a horrible accident. and trust me i tried using the idea that it was all in my head and i can control the pain. But no, sometimes pain is to much.
False. Pain is very real. When I bring my granddaughter to the doctor, she cried when he stuck her with a needle. She is 1 year old, she didn't look at the needle, she didn't know what had happen to her but she certainly can feel the needle penetrated her skin.
True.
Without perception, there is no pain. Without the ability to feel (perceive in a bodily sense), you cannot comprehend or experience pain.
True, but with a qualification.
It isn't perception - it's REception. The receptors are what pick up pain and allow us to react and avoid it.
In terms of perception, yes - that is part of it but not the whole story. There can be a bit of mind over matter. You can distract people from feeling the pain as strongly (or while pain meds kick in) by watching a movie together or talking, but again - the pain is still there.
If you want to learn more on this topic, ask people what giving birth was like. I had a doctor who told me to think of it as pressure. What a nut! It wasn't pressure! It was pain!!!
But everyone has a different ';labor'; story and it can shed a lot of light on this topic.
FALSE -- Physical pain is real and not subject to denial.
TRUE -- Hypnosis (for example) can help one mask the physiologic sensation of pain for a time, which is why it's so useful in dentistry and pain management.
So pain is partially perception, and partially really real. And therefore the answer to your question is both true and false.
(And you have now discovered the problem with Antithetical reasoning, the ';either/or'; problem) Nice going...
true and false...
yes there is s such thing as mind over matter... but that ';mind over matter'; is not controlled by you telling yourself that the pain is all in your head...
the neurons and synapses in you body/brain either send a message to your spinal cord/brain telling you to feel the pain or to not feel the pain... there is no way for you to tell yourself to forget the pain... your BODY decides when it is in too much pain and acts accordingly... usually meaning... at the time of the accident or injury... you will not feel AS MUCH pain.. you will obviously still have pain... but your nervous system will make it more easy for you to handle...
Lets break it down.
Perception refers to all senses, and conscious conceptualization.
Pain exists both in the senses and in the mind.
Psychological pain can be very different and separate from the physical, though it usually results from traumatic experience involving pain.
I can think of no instance where pain falls outside of perception.
Therefor I say TRUE.
Now I think you are looking for truth in the idea that you can control pain. I have first hand experience with having mental power over both physical pain and illness. Pain is just a signal to inform you that you shouldn't be doing that. It serves no purpose to the functionality of your body's operation, and so can be turned off, like a warning alarm. Your body can produce a chemical into the nerve synapse that ';fills'; the pain receptor just like aspirin does. You just have to learn how to use these tools.
If the pain is severe because of a major injury, then this will require a lot more energy to maintain a necessary mindset.
If you do not produce enough energy by decreased diet and activity, then it will become increasingly difficult to control pain.
On another note. If you think of emotional pain caused by jealousy, or deceit... well then this too can be a matter of perception because to be jealous you must think someone belonged to you prior to being ';taken.'; Too feel hurt by someone else's actions can also be resolved by a simple change of perception. This is what forgiveness is all about.
Each situation is unique though and would need to be addressed accordingly.True or False: Pain is all perception.?
True. Pain is perceived just like feeling pleasant is perceived. The part that varies is how to what the degree of pain is. Some people react incredibly outrageous to say a beesting. Their perception of pain is high. To others when they get stung they say ';ouch, or sh**'; not as bad in this case. Their perception of pain is mild.
no, the reason different people feel pain at different levels is because some have a higher or lower pain tolerance. for example my husband has a high pain tolerance so he thinks everyone should. but my son and i have a low pain tolerance and everything hurts us more. it's just the way we are.
true. well said by michele!
FALSE. I have been in a horrible accident. and trust me i tried using the idea that it was all in my head and i can control the pain. But no, sometimes pain is to much.
False. Pain is very real. When I bring my granddaughter to the doctor, she cried when he stuck her with a needle. She is 1 year old, she didn't look at the needle, she didn't know what had happen to her but she certainly can feel the needle penetrated her skin.
True.
Without perception, there is no pain. Without the ability to feel (perceive in a bodily sense), you cannot comprehend or experience pain.
True, but with a qualification.
It isn't perception - it's REception. The receptors are what pick up pain and allow us to react and avoid it.
In terms of perception, yes - that is part of it but not the whole story. There can be a bit of mind over matter. You can distract people from feeling the pain as strongly (or while pain meds kick in) by watching a movie together or talking, but again - the pain is still there.
If you want to learn more on this topic, ask people what giving birth was like. I had a doctor who told me to think of it as pressure. What a nut! It wasn't pressure! It was pain!!!
But everyone has a different ';labor'; story and it can shed a lot of light on this topic.
FALSE -- Physical pain is real and not subject to denial.
TRUE -- Hypnosis (for example) can help one mask the physiologic sensation of pain for a time, which is why it's so useful in dentistry and pain management.
So pain is partially perception, and partially really real. And therefore the answer to your question is both true and false.
(And you have now discovered the problem with Antithetical reasoning, the ';either/or'; problem) Nice going...
true and false...
yes there is s such thing as mind over matter... but that ';mind over matter'; is not controlled by you telling yourself that the pain is all in your head...
the neurons and synapses in you body/brain either send a message to your spinal cord/brain telling you to feel the pain or to not feel the pain... there is no way for you to tell yourself to forget the pain... your BODY decides when it is in too much pain and acts accordingly... usually meaning... at the time of the accident or injury... you will not feel AS MUCH pain.. you will obviously still have pain... but your nervous system will make it more easy for you to handle...
Perception is entirely subjective. Truth or false?
If this is true, I would argue that this is the only knowable, absolute truth. Logic, and the a priori, analytical ';knowledge'; that we gain from it are meaningless without the subjective perception of objective truths--if they even exist. If false, please explain.Perception is entirely subjective. Truth or false?
Kant got things VERY mixed up, and you sound Kantian.
';The cognitive function of concepts was undercut by a series of grotesque devices鈥攕uch, for instance, as the ';analytic-synthetic'; dichotomy which, by a route of tortuous circumlocutions and equivocations, leads to the dogma that a ';necessarily'; true proposition cannot be factual, and a factual proposition cannot be ';necessarily'; true.';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 102
';An analytic proposition is defined as one which can be validated merely by an analysis of the meaning of its constituent concepts. The critical question is: What is included in ';the meaning of a concept';? Does a concept mean the existents which it subsumes, including all their characteristics? Or does it mean only certain aspects of these existents, designating some of their characteristics but excluding others?
The latter viewpoint is fundamental to every version of the analytic-synthetic dichotomy. The advocates of this dichotomy divide the characteristics of the existents subsumed under a concept into two groups: those which are included in the meaning of the concept, and those鈥攖he great majority鈥攚hich, they claim, are excluded from its meaning. The dichotomy among propositions follows directly. If a proposition links the ';included'; characteristics with the concept, it can be validated merely by an ';analysis'; of the concept; if it links the ';excluded'; characteristics with the concept, it represents an act of ';synthesis.';
Leonard Peikoff, ';The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 127.
';The theory of the analytic-synthetic dichotomy has its roots in two types of error: one epistemological, the other metaphysical. The epistemological error, as I have discussed, is an incorrect view of the nature of concepts. The metaphysical error is: the dichotomy between necessary and contingent facts.';
Leonard Peikoff, ';The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 144.Perception is entirely subjective. Truth or false?
I think you should have said subjective perception of objective reality. Each of us has our subjective experience within the totality of reality, and whether or not it will ever be possible to be sure one has the correct perception of objective reality is debatable. We should at least always be aspiring to seek that knowledge of precisely what objective reality is without discarding the personal preferences within our unique subjective realities concerning things like beauty. A group of others may have a common aesthetic value of beauty and even declare the specifics thereof, but that should never allow them to expect you, me, or anyone else to abandon what you know without forethought to beautiful and what is ugly. One might say that it is obviously an objective fact that there are many differing subjective perceptions of beauty and ugliness.
Your words are confusing me. But I think I know what you are asking. And in answer to your question, yes perception is subjective. but we also have instinct, vision, passion, insight and desire to deal with.
That's what they all want us to believe and to an extent, factually, is somwhat necessary righ now.
Most of our guides have failed us or we simply couldn't see it all at one time. To gain an open eye or to be truly understood with all of our hearts and too many times for petty reasons. No matter how hard it's been attempted to keep us all fenced in like beaten cows they still can't seem to stop all of us from questioning their direction. We doubt because our instincts drive us to. We fight back, beacuse our intincts tell us too. It is our nature to question everything that doens't make sence.
Insecurity is a form of pergatory for misguided visionaries who have been bullied into thier subjective position. Insecurity is seeded by guilt.
That is just human nature. If you can find and a better way that is prooven to work, than get on with it. Otherwise just keep cuttin the grass.
A good leader doesn't make more money than you do. A true leader makes a good life beside you.
This idea cannot be absolute truth because there is not way to prove it. How can you test all perceptions, in all people, for all time? And, how would you show (perceive?) that all perceptions were/are 'subjective'?
It may be more accurate to suggest that all perceptions may be modulated by subjectivity.
I think I may know one absolute truth, we will all die in some way or another in this physical world such that the being that died (the clear definition of death) is no longer living (the common term of living). Of course this is entirely dependent on the definition of death and life and what death and life really mean/are/is.
';Perception'; and ';subjective'; are like terms. They both imply the same event, an individual's perspective. I have no argument.
How can you doubt the existence of Objective Truths while speaking in absolutes such as Entirely, Only, etc.. In a world based on perception, how can there be any absolutes?
Slow down grasshopper... Wise sage says ';How do you explain the existence of other people, and their correspondence to your reality?';
After you chew on that fat, come back and ask another question....
Plus your argument is little sketchy...
Perception is subjective, right. But reality is not. There are absolutes in the world.
only if you are alone on the planet.. Alone perception is meaningless.
Both true and false
Kant got things VERY mixed up, and you sound Kantian.
';The cognitive function of concepts was undercut by a series of grotesque devices鈥攕uch, for instance, as the ';analytic-synthetic'; dichotomy which, by a route of tortuous circumlocutions and equivocations, leads to the dogma that a ';necessarily'; true proposition cannot be factual, and a factual proposition cannot be ';necessarily'; true.';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 102
';An analytic proposition is defined as one which can be validated merely by an analysis of the meaning of its constituent concepts. The critical question is: What is included in ';the meaning of a concept';? Does a concept mean the existents which it subsumes, including all their characteristics? Or does it mean only certain aspects of these existents, designating some of their characteristics but excluding others?
The latter viewpoint is fundamental to every version of the analytic-synthetic dichotomy. The advocates of this dichotomy divide the characteristics of the existents subsumed under a concept into two groups: those which are included in the meaning of the concept, and those鈥攖he great majority鈥攚hich, they claim, are excluded from its meaning. The dichotomy among propositions follows directly. If a proposition links the ';included'; characteristics with the concept, it can be validated merely by an ';analysis'; of the concept; if it links the ';excluded'; characteristics with the concept, it represents an act of ';synthesis.';
Leonard Peikoff, ';The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 127.
';The theory of the analytic-synthetic dichotomy has its roots in two types of error: one epistemological, the other metaphysical. The epistemological error, as I have discussed, is an incorrect view of the nature of concepts. The metaphysical error is: the dichotomy between necessary and contingent facts.';
Leonard Peikoff, ';The Analytic-Synthetic Dichotomy,';
Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, 144.Perception is entirely subjective. Truth or false?
I think you should have said subjective perception of objective reality. Each of us has our subjective experience within the totality of reality, and whether or not it will ever be possible to be sure one has the correct perception of objective reality is debatable. We should at least always be aspiring to seek that knowledge of precisely what objective reality is without discarding the personal preferences within our unique subjective realities concerning things like beauty. A group of others may have a common aesthetic value of beauty and even declare the specifics thereof, but that should never allow them to expect you, me, or anyone else to abandon what you know without forethought to beautiful and what is ugly. One might say that it is obviously an objective fact that there are many differing subjective perceptions of beauty and ugliness.
Your words are confusing me. But I think I know what you are asking. And in answer to your question, yes perception is subjective. but we also have instinct, vision, passion, insight and desire to deal with.
That's what they all want us to believe and to an extent, factually, is somwhat necessary righ now.
Most of our guides have failed us or we simply couldn't see it all at one time. To gain an open eye or to be truly understood with all of our hearts and too many times for petty reasons. No matter how hard it's been attempted to keep us all fenced in like beaten cows they still can't seem to stop all of us from questioning their direction. We doubt because our instincts drive us to. We fight back, beacuse our intincts tell us too. It is our nature to question everything that doens't make sence.
Insecurity is a form of pergatory for misguided visionaries who have been bullied into thier subjective position. Insecurity is seeded by guilt.
That is just human nature. If you can find and a better way that is prooven to work, than get on with it. Otherwise just keep cuttin the grass.
A good leader doesn't make more money than you do. A true leader makes a good life beside you.
This idea cannot be absolute truth because there is not way to prove it. How can you test all perceptions, in all people, for all time? And, how would you show (perceive?) that all perceptions were/are 'subjective'?
It may be more accurate to suggest that all perceptions may be modulated by subjectivity.
I think I may know one absolute truth, we will all die in some way or another in this physical world such that the being that died (the clear definition of death) is no longer living (the common term of living). Of course this is entirely dependent on the definition of death and life and what death and life really mean/are/is.
';Perception'; and ';subjective'; are like terms. They both imply the same event, an individual's perspective. I have no argument.
How can you doubt the existence of Objective Truths while speaking in absolutes such as Entirely, Only, etc.. In a world based on perception, how can there be any absolutes?
Slow down grasshopper... Wise sage says ';How do you explain the existence of other people, and their correspondence to your reality?';
After you chew on that fat, come back and ask another question....
Plus your argument is little sketchy...
Perception is subjective, right. But reality is not. There are absolutes in the world.
only if you are alone on the planet.. Alone perception is meaningless.
Both true and false
True or False: the outside world's perception of you is more accurate than the perception you have of yourself?
False.
The outside world does not know you. They judge based on appearances and impressions. Like if a person is really shy, outsiders may see them as cold, unfriendly, whatever, but in reality they could be a super nice person that just takes a while to warm up to new people. I'm not the type to disclose every detail of myself to people so I don't feel like anyone knows me better than I know myself. Even the people I'm closest to don't know every little thing about my personality.True or False: the outside world's perception of you is more accurate than the perception you have of yourself?
Depends on the perception and what the perception is and who it is coming from. Some perceptions are correct, others are false. One correct perception about one part of you by one person could be dead on right, but another person, with a differing perception about the same part of you, can be dead wrong.True or False: the outside world's perception of you is more accurate than the perception you have of yourself?
I think there's some truth to that, actually. It can often be easier for someone to tell you things about who you are and how you behave that you don't want to believe or face, or just flat-out are unaware of. Obviously, there are things that you know about yourself that most other people couldn't know. But in many ways, all of us are unaware of many aspects of ourselves that are very obvious to other people. For example, some people genuinely are unaware of things about them that keep people from approaching them for relationships and/or friendships (see these kind of questions all the time here), and another person who has observed them could tell them right off many of the things about them that makes others not approach. Oftentimes, these people think they are one way when the vibes they're giving off or the way they carry him/herself is really different.
False if you are wise, acting on one's own beliefs is more important then acting on those of another. But, if the soundness of truth is of importance then the wise person seeks the council of others. More realistically, get opinions before you do something and screw up.
false if you are secure and confident
true if you are insecure and still a soul in search of what you 're looking for
I think most people know me better than I know myself.
The outside world does not know you. They judge based on appearances and impressions. Like if a person is really shy, outsiders may see them as cold, unfriendly, whatever, but in reality they could be a super nice person that just takes a while to warm up to new people. I'm not the type to disclose every detail of myself to people so I don't feel like anyone knows me better than I know myself. Even the people I'm closest to don't know every little thing about my personality.True or False: the outside world's perception of you is more accurate than the perception you have of yourself?
Depends on the perception and what the perception is and who it is coming from. Some perceptions are correct, others are false. One correct perception about one part of you by one person could be dead on right, but another person, with a differing perception about the same part of you, can be dead wrong.True or False: the outside world's perception of you is more accurate than the perception you have of yourself?
I think there's some truth to that, actually. It can often be easier for someone to tell you things about who you are and how you behave that you don't want to believe or face, or just flat-out are unaware of. Obviously, there are things that you know about yourself that most other people couldn't know. But in many ways, all of us are unaware of many aspects of ourselves that are very obvious to other people. For example, some people genuinely are unaware of things about them that keep people from approaching them for relationships and/or friendships (see these kind of questions all the time here), and another person who has observed them could tell them right off many of the things about them that makes others not approach. Oftentimes, these people think they are one way when the vibes they're giving off or the way they carry him/herself is really different.
False if you are wise, acting on one's own beliefs is more important then acting on those of another. But, if the soundness of truth is of importance then the wise person seeks the council of others. More realistically, get opinions before you do something and screw up.
false if you are secure and confident
true if you are insecure and still a soul in search of what you 're looking for
I think most people know me better than I know myself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)