Can I bother you for Change?

Changing Times Changing Minds 

Let’s talk about personal change and relationships. We all have unique and specific traits developed from life experiences that shape our perspectives and desires from a young age. It defines us.

We were forming the basis for a powerful combination of compulsions and expectations reflecting how we act today, accounting for our varying expressions, rationale, or personal accountability.  It also influences the criteria and parameters of our relationships.

In other words, everything we have experienced contributes to some fluctuating degree of how we view life and what we become. Subsequently, it directs our behavior from the beginning of our life’s interactions, whether conscious of this fact or not.

Consequently, we learn by what we were taught or by what we were exposed to etched as accumulating experiences.  Even if these are shared experiences, they can never be perceived or imitated identically. The parts and participants are different. However, the expectations and projections often remain similar to the initial impression.

Our core integrity and identity evolve from our impressions as instructions of emulation. It even prevents us from being free to disengage or be open to change, being hostage to the psychological impressions of unwanted occupying depictions. Instead, we are compelled to imitate or resist replicating these influences as being preferred or not.

Don’t get me wrong; everything is not subject to negotiations or change, either governed by choice or compulsion. But, of course, we have our standards and will defend them because changing sometimes is not an easy task, especially if unaware.

From the restrictive lens in the confines of our “learned knowledge” and “limited experiences” specific to our influences, the standard is established by which we project ourselves as well as judge others.  Thus, the inconsistencies appear when we judge others in a manner that we prefer not to be judged.

Judging not the specific actions but the steadfast adherence to a way of being or insistence that another not be a particular way. We should not be caught being guilty of what we accuse others of, should we? By this standard, insisting on change can only be subjective and internally directed. Yet, it is the only change we have control over, and sometimes not even then.

Time may heal wounds, but it also exposes the truth. It most certainly distorts our core perception to shield examination of our predispositions from questioning.  The prior held compulsions from the period they were developed are distorted by time. But, is it in conflict now not accounting for the changes since that time? The need to conceal or deny them provides the answer, in which change is the solution.

After expanding our knowledge and experience, which initially consisted of significant diaper and potty time, we began to build a social rolodex of emotions. It is understandable if children do childish acts of concealment and lack the proper self-control but less so as you age and certainly not as adults.

The passing of time should enhance relationships and not smother their aspirations and possibilities. When sacrificing expression of your core desires through commitments and routines that build boredom, resentment, or limitations for the fulfillment of others, it does you no favors.

Just as they are free or not to express themselves, so are you and vice versa. The even yoke refers to the compatibility of your sincere freedom of expression manifesting authentically with your mate. But, maybe it should be to yourself. Any pretension or incumbrances indicates dissatisfaction and the need for it or you to change since someone else’s change is outside your domain.  

Conversely, as much as you are committed to your way, why can’t someone else be just as committed to their way? Why are their beliefs not just as certain as your commitment to yours? The key is both must be respected and devoid of infringement and must possess acceptance or at least tolerance if necessary. Tolerance is a parallel option to change.

All things change. It is inevitable. But, as time waits on no one, how much time do you have to wait on someone else’s change before bringing about one in yourself? Time is a valuable limited commodity. The young become old, the body’s flexibility is exchanged for flexibility of thought called maturity.

As things evolve, change is going to happen. So why is depletion or deterioration often necessary before a change occurs? The passion you used to feel, the anticipation, and the intoxicating excitement has been dulled by father time and lessened by your surrender to another’s restrictions.

It required complete surrender to acceptance, comfortability, and familiarity with the thrill being gone. It might not be decision-making time, but at least it is evaluation time. Is it your choice, which is fine, or undetected by time dulling of the senses and expectations? Pleasure is what you define it as for yourself, contentment devoid of dormant desires forsaken for complacency. 

Otherwise, it is a compromise of respect or diversion by dissolution. An agreement is not required because an agreement may not be attainable. It then does not require your consent but your submission. Acceptance may be a tolerable solution under the immunity of honesty.

Under a treaty of honesty, without deception or reprisal, primary is the courage to say it or receive it being said. Persuaded to lay bare the requirements of your satisfaction or willingness to satisfy.

Of course, a person can not be expected to meet all your needs and expectations, just as you cannot theirs. However, there is a tipping point where it is no longer fair exchange but robbery. Honesty would then be preferable to expectations begrudgingly met.

The reward for honesty is trust, and the penalty is acceptance of the honesty, not necessarily the conditions. Under this understanding, we only have to agree that you will respect mine as I will respect yours. It is a manageable compromise based upon what you are willing to give and what you are ready to accept that meets each other’s level of acceptance and satisfaction.

Concealment of your core promotes a response toward a masquerade instead of what would satisfy your needs. So, for example, parts of people you think you know very well are hidden from view and not for display shrouded by secrecy, shame, or deceit. The gift is glimpsing their nature and exposing yours protected from a penalty for doing so.

This hidden core either propels or confines but remains a third or fourth party to the relationship. As a result, most actions will hit the projection but miss the target.

Are you adhering to obsolete and antiquated images that form a projection that comforts you while deceiving others? Or maybe it restricts you while comforting others. Do you cling to that which is familiar but of little benefit, a prisoner of expectations?

 

Are you still guarding the fox hole when the matter has been determined long ago to be no longer contested as to who and what you are? How much time will you trick off pretending while mostly fooling yourself? Acceptance of you starts with you, the same as accountability and responsibility.

Will it be kept one thousand protecting the smothering masquerade or changed to release the unfulfilled real identity and expectations of yourself? Achieving a compromise or change must be directed toward securing a satisfactory outcome for the real problem or fear, your authenticity. You might have to accept their’s as well since the mirror is a projection and a reflection.

The more concessions you receive, the greater level of satisfaction you have. Consequently, what compromises or accommodations are you willing to give in return to maintain that level? Thus, a balance is created by transferring equitable preferences received in exchange for mutual satisfaction.

It is a give-to-get theory, but it may call for change or a willingness to change. Your actions then become a negotiated understanding by your benefit received.

A mutual understanding of this is the motivation to adhere to an acceptable level of conduct to receive the agreed-upon consideration in return. The cost comes in many forms, and payments are accepted in many more forms. The exchange is transactional for that thing you do.

Do you still expect the exchange without providing the value? Is it a stubbornness of expectations that prevents you from producing an exchange that improves the value of your association with each other?

First, let us examine why things might be the way they are or have been to evaluate if logic guided these responses and behaviors or errant emotions and deceit. We can then assess the changes we have control over.

So let us take it back before it goes wrong. Remember when we were motivated to impress a long time ago. As a result, we improved to be more alluring and the best adaptation of ourselves to attract our expectations. Was the change real or deceitful? This creates the very reasons we do the things we do, the why, and how or with whom we do them. 

Time reinforces distortions that magnify and create most insecurities, leading to a voluntary forbearance of our needs based on anticipated returns. Therefore, it builds dissatisfaction while craving a resolution to satisfy the void, the unfulfilled expectation.

It is human nature to feel a deficiency and have a corresponding emotional disposition. Thus, the feeling of lack is embraced as recognition of a void craving greater satisfaction. Accordingly, a desire to the addiction of expectations surrendered may develop.

It requires expressing our very nature to avoid feeling unable to give or maybe unworthy of receiving by refusal to express or reveal ourselves. It flows freely when given purely and is humbling when overflowingly received. This is the nectar illustrating what once was could be restored for just the tiny concession of change.

We must simply realize that the change in the relationship I am referring to is the one with ourselves. The internal influencing the external. Therefore, the changes are the ones we need to make within ourselves, influencing the change in others. However, their evolution may never come.

If they only would have changed have been adjusted as denial to justify our inaction. This blame perspective does not assert accountability over ourselves as the persuasion for others to recognize our value. If not, we can not blame others for the decisions we refuse to make.

A fresh start is frequently needed for rejuvenation or liberation to unleash our uninhibited expression. It requires breaking free from previous masquerades of restrictive expectations and behaviors. It requires making a choice.

Is it cheaper to keep our situations, projections, and perspectives devoid of the joy and exhilaration of self-expression? The beneficial effect on ourselves, others, and the quality of our relationships and life being hostage to an image, an imposter?

The power, control, and responsibility for our feelings or behavior remain our own. Therefore, in addition to being accountable for what we do or fail to do, we must refuse any obligation to be responsible for someone else’s. Instead, are we giving what we are seeking to receive, making a self-assessment to determine what is desirable, and implementing what it requires.

The change we would want the most is probably the one we need to make the most. So, double the improvement, solving two issues with one change.

First, holding ourselves to a standard of determination and perspective to portray ourselves without misconceptions seeking validation from others for their permission to be us. Secondly, our perspective dictates our mood, consequently controlling our mood controls our behavior.

A willingness to change by improving, evolving, growing, reinventing, pursuing, expressing, challenging, and in other words living without self-restricting doubts or perfection.

Accepting our uniqueness and insecurities as an unfinished work in progress reassures the only person we need to convince, and that is us. As humans, we all have limitations, so accept them but improve them.

Like wearing new clothes that make us feel good, a fresh perspective and self-fulfillment can work wonders, and we can wear them every day. But, initially, a shake-up of old self-defeating unfulfilling restrictions has to occur. Much like outdated gear, that has to go, especially if it is a loose fit or, worst, way too restricting.

Be sure not to become the very thing you despise the most and bring dissatisfaction upon yourself by refusing to change. Your level of contentment rests with your adaptability to your environment to attract your desired preferences that reflect your expectations.

Don’t flatter yourself. What is not attractive in others is no more somehow attractive in you. It is a difference between a classic antique and just plain outdated.

Start by eliminating excuses and becoming what you want to be by sacrificing the required effort to become self-fulfilling and authentic. That will be the best relationship you have ever had.

Do not be that person where it is said behind your back, of course, that you are no bed of roses. No matter what, don’t be the biggest problem in your life because you cannot change. Keeping those negative attributes is never cheaper to keep em when you add them up. Bothering to change is much better.

Keep in mind this is not gender-oriented but people-specific, where one size fits all changes. 

 

Thurston K. Atlas
Creating A Buzz

 

The Ugly Truth or a Pretty Lie

Do you Know the Truth?

Is the truth subjective and situationally influenced by our perspective’s radius and the conditions that apply to our circumstances? Personal truths which often emerge through heritage are usually dependent upon conditioning and reinforced through our experiences and environment that provide proof and acceptance of its legitimacy.

The flaw with personal truth is that they lead to the pretty lies that we convince ourselves are true, then we seek confirmation by our biased metric of verification within our subgroup. So then, our truth can always be proven by the criteria and method in which it is favorably applied, measured, and verified.

With the many variations of truth-proving processes and their interpretations, there can be any number of truths logically deduced and seemingly proven. It would then seem to fluctuate depending on who you are, where you are from, where you are, or even more importantly, what you would like it to be.

How many truths can there be? Let us count the ways. First, you have your more basic ones. You have relative truth in comparison to something else like a higher-suited card. There is the old standby, the convenient truth when you need it the most to suit your purpose.

The objective truth is when you are just allegedly unbiasedly saying, while the subjective truth is generally because you said so. The historical truth is how it has always been often without even knowing why.

Your higher-level truths are the ones that have collective persuasion supporting them, making them more widely acceptable and supposedly less partisan. The ultimate truth can be obtained but must be maintained, so it is fleeting by nature.

The universal truth is not all-inclusive of knowledge, so it is incomplete. Absolute truth is limited to what is known and, by definition, inconclusive. Empirical truth is based upon observing and quantifying the measurements. It is likely to fluctuate according to the subjective interpretation of the observer.

If perception is reality, then experience dictates the validity of that perspective. When convinced of the certainty of our beliefs, it becomes the irrefutable basis for our actions. Our judgments produce our conclusions based on these assertions. The context of our truth is the extent of our knowledge until more extensive knowledge or different circumstances replace it.

It then exists in contrast to what is rejected or accepted as fact with limited experience or lack of understanding. Thus, it has just as many implications as the metric used to evaluate and establish full acceptance.

Your belief system is assembled by what consumes the void and what is accepted as fact. You act upon that fact which fills this void, thereby conceding to submit to a sphere of this reality which you apply to external spheres seeking commonality as proof.

These commonalities reinforce these comparative analyses within the adopted interpretations forming your associations and approval basis then producing integration and assumptions of the truth, if you will, in a definitive system of your operating ideology.

Our established realities create a binary system where that which does not conform to our truths must be false. There is rarely a consideration by us that our reality may be faulty. It is almost always the flawed reality of another while our default personal defense mechanism protects our perspective.

As humans, we believe what we are conditioned to believe, but these beliefs are not scientific in their selection or application and often don’t have to be true. Often it is all we know, but how much more is there to be known?

We have to wonder if we can trust our truth. It is fragile and has a random dependency on arbitrary provocations and provisional systems presented as proof. Consequently, it has to be defined by the collective belief and acknowledgment that certain human behavior under specific influences and circumstances will produce varying outcomes.

So, the resulting truth must also be varied, not confined by predictable human behavior but by the variable outcomes. The truth would then be predicated and fabricated on a somewhat simulated belief system with no proven point of reference. The reference point would be transient, making it ever-changing and subjective. It would be biased based upon a limited radius of understanding or acceptance.

The truth could be a virtual Mandela effect subject to change or imitating a mirage. Can a “lie” then be an alternative reality limitedly accepted outside of the liar’s mind or be just a contrary belief or reality not collectively shared and rejected? After all, it is acceptable to the mind of the liar as a form of truth.

Is truth an illusion that we all function within as a confirmed and collectively agreed upon judgment, which gives stability and conformity to a moment in time? Must it then be stagnant and constant to be true in an ever-changing environment?

Can it co-exist with other equally valid truths, or must there be only one? Does acceptance of its validation make it a certainty within the variations of truth? Can one that does not infringe, victimize, harm, or obstruct others remain a personal preference of acceptance even though not true?

Is all truth a personal preference based on an accumulation of experiences and knowledge or lack of which will terminate itself when the believer is expired? Since it can exist beyond the believer to influence those indoctrinated to its acceptance, would it not be free to manifest in another to evolve, allowing them to reject it as their truth separate from that belief? Hence. truth expires when the belief is gone, not the believer.

The ugly truth is that very few things are true even when accepted and established as a societal certainty. If you wait long enough when more knowledgeable minds prevail, any belief will likely adjust to a new reality or acceptance.

Isn’t it a pretty lie when we believe it to be an actuality but restricted by the limitations of our understanding or interpretation? The truth changes according to new information and evolving circumstances.

In the end, it is Crystal clear that there is no truth other than the limitations of our knowledge. There is always a limited radius within the sphere of knowledge, creating a scope of perspective, which defines its boundaries until expanded by a more compelling “truth” or knowledge.

Acceptance of our solitary truth is camouflaged by the pretty lie that we pretend to know the truth with certainty. Our pretty lie is the definitive assumption of what is really the ugly truth. Now that is THE truth.

 

Thurston K. Atlas

Creating A Buzz