social dynamics the gang of four:
given that it is far from rare, and that the median social group is often thus, let us then examine the dynamic that exists between four people, although even transient it may be, and let not how it came to be, this gang of four, trouble us, rather so how it functions be the operative question. why four? is two or three not enough?
a gang, a party, an expeditionary force, to expedite matters in life or business, renders the individual qualms about being on your own, to rest, the total of a gang of four is more than the sum of each member parts, which is why! role playing, even board games, these things don't function for the player in isolation, not only are other people required to operate such, to state all gain from such! we need someone physically capable, we need someone cerebral, we need a wizard mayhap, we need someone adept, maybe we need more in this crew!
skills that contribute to the welfare of the party, for the mission in life, to the bitter end if need be, make up the set of talents core to the group. primary to the cohesive nature of the gang is a facility for easy interaction, an agreement on secular matters at least, there are a range of issues to debate over time.
why not less? why not be alone? and so searching for something, best described as moving toward a common goal is what molds the group and holds it fast.
a common identity becomes them. what trace the gang of four leaves remains within them.
CLEARCHARGE
Showing posts with label social. Show all posts
Showing posts with label social. Show all posts
Sunday, August 7, 2016
Tuesday, September 15, 2015
The Ego Obstacle
the ego obstacle:
to have an ego is embarrassing at times, the big i am on the spot, the things you don't want other people to know about yourself necessarily. an ego may be an obstacle in human relations. when it's entirely about me how could it be about you therefore?
what does the ego want? can it happen? the ego is value judgmental, is obstinate, is inclined toward angry outbursts when it is frustrated. okay, i don't want all this...
when it is true, the ego provides a measure of security, to be clear about what you are is not always a bad thing. but to be self obsessed in company presents a difficult situation. to have a running battle with your own ego demand and what other people want in the situation is hard. you could wax lyrical about yourself but you remain without the sympathy of the crowd.
CLEARCHARGE
to have an ego is embarrassing at times, the big i am on the spot, the things you don't want other people to know about yourself necessarily. an ego may be an obstacle in human relations. when it's entirely about me how could it be about you therefore?
what does the ego want? can it happen? the ego is value judgmental, is obstinate, is inclined toward angry outbursts when it is frustrated. okay, i don't want all this...
when it is true, the ego provides a measure of security, to be clear about what you are is not always a bad thing. but to be self obsessed in company presents a difficult situation. to have a running battle with your own ego demand and what other people want in the situation is hard. you could wax lyrical about yourself but you remain without the sympathy of the crowd.
CLEARCHARGE
Monday, June 15, 2015
Social Work and Play in School
social work and play in school:
nursery school at the Rosebank at the age of three to four, the first day little remembered, then learning numbers, how eight was written, naps after lunch, play in the playground, waiting after the finish. the first day of school at Cavendish is clearer, name tags, the name of the teacher.
who gets along with who? who follows who? trouble in the second year, accusations, boys upset. rainy day, what to do at lunchtime? the long afternoons, struggling in English, waiting for schoolday to finish. the importance of the teacher's name and title, birthdays, writing about the weekend past.
knowing boys' names, speaking your mind, remembering who talks to who, all very uppermost in his mind. food was a big deal, what you had for recess, whether you drank milk and what kind, white or chocolate? how to get out of fluoride tablets? gossiping about other boys' parents, family, the teacher's daughter. did life ever really change?
what did you want to be? what could you do? follow interest on the school playground, make an effort in class, humour the teacher about what you did last weekend!
CLEARCHARGE
nursery school at the Rosebank at the age of three to four, the first day little remembered, then learning numbers, how eight was written, naps after lunch, play in the playground, waiting after the finish. the first day of school at Cavendish is clearer, name tags, the name of the teacher.
who gets along with who? who follows who? trouble in the second year, accusations, boys upset. rainy day, what to do at lunchtime? the long afternoons, struggling in English, waiting for schoolday to finish. the importance of the teacher's name and title, birthdays, writing about the weekend past.
knowing boys' names, speaking your mind, remembering who talks to who, all very uppermost in his mind. food was a big deal, what you had for recess, whether you drank milk and what kind, white or chocolate? how to get out of fluoride tablets? gossiping about other boys' parents, family, the teacher's daughter. did life ever really change?
what did you want to be? what could you do? follow interest on the school playground, make an effort in class, humour the teacher about what you did last weekend!
CLEARCHARGE
Monday, March 16, 2015
The Frame of the One
the frame of the one:
how does it start, anyway? you know yourself. if you accept the concept of time zero, with nothing before then, who is to say that God or anyone, created you, given that you as one person existed from the beginning of time immemorial. you did not even create yourself. you just were. there is, and was, no explanation, and never will there be one, for why you, or greater reality exists.
i am. what else, or who else exists? are they the same? if not, how different? what am i? what parts constitute me, and what parts constitute any person, for that matter?
if i could find one other person, in a leap of induction, many more might exist, surely that is the case? the question then becomes, well, how many in the quantity of person?
now you have Earth 3D all around, social networks, computer networks, family networks, business networks, etc., all groups or sets composed of such persons. the question becomes, are they really connected overall? are there some, for practical purposes, isolated groups separate from the main mass of society?
even if everyone is connected does that mean however that there is little or no affect at a distance? electronic transmission fades, meetings don't happen, even if they did, their resulting influence on me is negligible, for i don't remember it even if it did happen.
maybe i am in a network of 4 million or even 4 billion, computer code streaming across my personal electronic field. this is only apparent now, certainly not at time zero, the first day, or even 100 years ago.
CLEARCHARGE
how does it start, anyway? you know yourself. if you accept the concept of time zero, with nothing before then, who is to say that God or anyone, created you, given that you as one person existed from the beginning of time immemorial. you did not even create yourself. you just were. there is, and was, no explanation, and never will there be one, for why you, or greater reality exists.
i am. what else, or who else exists? are they the same? if not, how different? what am i? what parts constitute me, and what parts constitute any person, for that matter?
if i could find one other person, in a leap of induction, many more might exist, surely that is the case? the question then becomes, well, how many in the quantity of person?
now you have Earth 3D all around, social networks, computer networks, family networks, business networks, etc., all groups or sets composed of such persons. the question becomes, are they really connected overall? are there some, for practical purposes, isolated groups separate from the main mass of society?
even if everyone is connected does that mean however that there is little or no affect at a distance? electronic transmission fades, meetings don't happen, even if they did, their resulting influence on me is negligible, for i don't remember it even if it did happen.
maybe i am in a network of 4 million or even 4 billion, computer code streaming across my personal electronic field. this is only apparent now, certainly not at time zero, the first day, or even 100 years ago.
CLEARCHARGE
Sunday, February 15, 2015
The Common Rule of Engagement
the commons rule of engagement:
weighing any decision in considering opposing outcomes, not just only for the worst, but for indeed the most truly positive of outcomes that could arise in the future, you must consider first what might happen within weeks, if not for ever after, and what could happen within the hour.
to approach is a frightening prospect, but also, to ignore is unacceptable. you see the eternal dilemma? that chance meeting happens is inevitable too. it must be said that things like saying hi and how are you, are universally acceptable so why not?
what do you expect? of yourself, as i have said before previously a few years ago in the post, In Play, you must explain yourself to yourself, without directing the play towards the other person. a player talking is a person seemingly without social motive. if the other person thinks about you not so much but rather your motives, perhaps that is inevitable. are you prepared to go all the way, or not? this is the most crucial question, i think in all social play.
to engage with one, is surely a social death about another person, without question. if i am with you, how can i be with it, the other person? hence jealousy turns to envy in all cases. but who said being a player wasn't dangerous? it only takes seconds for the audience to react badly.
all the way? why not? because i have other business? because i have problems? how did it happen? that i am here and you are here?
to invest in socializing is one thing, but it may distract from one's social ambitions elsewhere. i may seem distant, but at least i'm always thinking!
CLEARCHARGE
weighing any decision in considering opposing outcomes, not just only for the worst, but for indeed the most truly positive of outcomes that could arise in the future, you must consider first what might happen within weeks, if not for ever after, and what could happen within the hour.
to approach is a frightening prospect, but also, to ignore is unacceptable. you see the eternal dilemma? that chance meeting happens is inevitable too. it must be said that things like saying hi and how are you, are universally acceptable so why not?
what do you expect? of yourself, as i have said before previously a few years ago in the post, In Play, you must explain yourself to yourself, without directing the play towards the other person. a player talking is a person seemingly without social motive. if the other person thinks about you not so much but rather your motives, perhaps that is inevitable. are you prepared to go all the way, or not? this is the most crucial question, i think in all social play.
to engage with one, is surely a social death about another person, without question. if i am with you, how can i be with it, the other person? hence jealousy turns to envy in all cases. but who said being a player wasn't dangerous? it only takes seconds for the audience to react badly.
all the way? why not? because i have other business? because i have problems? how did it happen? that i am here and you are here?
to invest in socializing is one thing, but it may distract from one's social ambitions elsewhere. i may seem distant, but at least i'm always thinking!
CLEARCHARGE
Tuesday, January 27, 2015
The Metaphysics of Real Space
the metaphysics of real space:
first the visual bias, hence the 3D mechanical motion theoretical model, that what we see guides our way is true for all, but the blind.
it seems there are only 3 dimensions of space. but how is it that we can see and hear things at more or less the same spatial location around our head? is it because there are in fact more dimensions than 3? or is it that real space is so densely packed with light least bits of matter and sound least bits of matter in a variegated fashion?
or are there layers like a sandwich? a layer of sound least bits of matter behind a layer of light least bits of matter, for example? alternating layers perhaps?
if theoretically it is easy to call that, well maybe there are 4 dimensions of space, we however find it so hard to imagine that perhaps it's not true?
i am not a solipsist, the very thought turning to belief disturbs me greatly. but who does anyone really know apart from their neighbours stuck to them in real space? they say one little thing here can affect the whole world but is that even true? are there people out there who know nothing of me and for which i have no affect? personal bubble spaces may be connected in the sense that from least bit of matter to neighbouring least bit of matter there is a long chain but does one personal bubble space at one end of real space affect much the personal bubble space at the other end? it seems unlikely that people at the central zone of real space are solipsistic.
CLEARCHARGE
first the visual bias, hence the 3D mechanical motion theoretical model, that what we see guides our way is true for all, but the blind.
it seems there are only 3 dimensions of space. but how is it that we can see and hear things at more or less the same spatial location around our head? is it because there are in fact more dimensions than 3? or is it that real space is so densely packed with light least bits of matter and sound least bits of matter in a variegated fashion?
or are there layers like a sandwich? a layer of sound least bits of matter behind a layer of light least bits of matter, for example? alternating layers perhaps?
if theoretically it is easy to call that, well maybe there are 4 dimensions of space, we however find it so hard to imagine that perhaps it's not true?
i am not a solipsist, the very thought turning to belief disturbs me greatly. but who does anyone really know apart from their neighbours stuck to them in real space? they say one little thing here can affect the whole world but is that even true? are there people out there who know nothing of me and for which i have no affect? personal bubble spaces may be connected in the sense that from least bit of matter to neighbouring least bit of matter there is a long chain but does one personal bubble space at one end of real space affect much the personal bubble space at the other end? it seems unlikely that people at the central zone of real space are solipsistic.
CLEARCHARGE
Saturday, June 23, 2012
The Inevitable Abrasive Nature of the Web of Words
the inevitable abrasive nature of the web of words:
we may think of words as something insubstantial, perhaps just images in a book, text on a screen, sounds in our heads, but consider that they might be something more tangible, an essential part of the machinery of life and the universe. any procedure or social process in life on earth requires words, words make things work.
posit that words and their languages and meanings occupy their own dimension in space, that they are something as real and varied and substantial as the material of light or sound. they are an instrument of life. all words and their meanings form a web in space, all connected to each other. the ways they are linked and the conceptual distances between different words and their meanings are something we all know intuitively. and just by thinking and using words we shape and change this web all the time.
it is unfortunate that there are bad words, just as it is unfortunate that bad things happen. again it is unfortunate that we can carelessly trigger bad thoughts in others when talking. some words or phrases inevitably conjure up negative ideas, others, though neutral in themselves, may naturally lead to bad thoughts anyway, as they are only a short distance away. when they lead to bad thoughts about the person itself, calling into question its own beliefs about self, or play on its own worst fears, such that they might be true, the sometimes abrasive nature of words and language reveals itself. we are all party to fear and pride, such is the nature of the human being.
i fear this abrasive nature of words and talk is inevitable. often it is difficult to console anyone that frightened, or to validate anyone that proud. the perfect idealized conversation requires conditions of security and jolliness and mutual interest that cannot always be met. perhaps as the other person, you can only provide at best a sense that someone is not alone, that there is the other person who cares.
CLEARCHARGE
we may think of words as something insubstantial, perhaps just images in a book, text on a screen, sounds in our heads, but consider that they might be something more tangible, an essential part of the machinery of life and the universe. any procedure or social process in life on earth requires words, words make things work.
posit that words and their languages and meanings occupy their own dimension in space, that they are something as real and varied and substantial as the material of light or sound. they are an instrument of life. all words and their meanings form a web in space, all connected to each other. the ways they are linked and the conceptual distances between different words and their meanings are something we all know intuitively. and just by thinking and using words we shape and change this web all the time.
it is unfortunate that there are bad words, just as it is unfortunate that bad things happen. again it is unfortunate that we can carelessly trigger bad thoughts in others when talking. some words or phrases inevitably conjure up negative ideas, others, though neutral in themselves, may naturally lead to bad thoughts anyway, as they are only a short distance away. when they lead to bad thoughts about the person itself, calling into question its own beliefs about self, or play on its own worst fears, such that they might be true, the sometimes abrasive nature of words and language reveals itself. we are all party to fear and pride, such is the nature of the human being.
i fear this abrasive nature of words and talk is inevitable. often it is difficult to console anyone that frightened, or to validate anyone that proud. the perfect idealized conversation requires conditions of security and jolliness and mutual interest that cannot always be met. perhaps as the other person, you can only provide at best a sense that someone is not alone, that there is the other person who cares.
CLEARCHARGE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)