ALONE
We are all alone.
Each of us, ourselves, alone.
Entirely alone.
There are times when some of us, far from all of us but some of us, feel that someone is here for us.
They are not.
There are times when some of us feel that we are there for someone else.
We are not.
The human experience is supposed to be (if there is or ever was a plan for such things) one of extreme loneliness - if the evidence is to be believed.
The list of things that keep us apart is fairly small. It includes secrets, hurt feelings, unintentional and intentional oversights, embarrassment, shame, fear, doubt, and, by far the most significant, an insistence on not being "cheated".
Cheated comes in as many forms as there are people. More forms really, because there is real cheated for each individual and there is also perceived cheated for each individual.
"How do you cheat me; let me count the ways."
Real cheated is easy to see. It is when something was promised but the intent was to deliver something else, something less. Is perceived cheated when a perceived promise is different than what was delivered, or is it when something was delivered and perceived as different than what was promised?
If you accept a favor from me, does that mean you've promised to pay me back my impression of "in-kind"? If I accept a favor from you, will you believe that of me? Because I doubt, because I fear what you will expect, I can not accept. If no one can accept, no one can give.
We are all alone.
It should not be enough to not do anything bad to others to be considered "Good". We have learned that this is enough. Our teachers were people like us; our peers. This is a passive Good; this is just not being bad.
To be Good should mean more than just not being Bad.
But what can we do actively good to or for others that will not risk ourselves; that will not expose us to being taken advantage of, being cheated, embarrassed, or having our feelings hurt?
Nothing.
Where did this come from?
The best of us (?) believe that we should have a "total, unconditional, positive regard for other's values, attitudes, and beliefs". We also believe that a certain amount of self-responsibility rests with each of us. These beliefs are in conflict. Is one of them wrong?
"You get nothing for nothing."
"Fair is fair."
"I owe you one."
These statements are used interchangeably to express gratitude and to justify vengeful acts. How can they be acceptable for both conditions? Especially if they are not true.
"Nothing for Nothing." How many of us pay for being alive? How many of us pay for the ability to taste food, to feel the warmth of the sun, our ability to experience pleasure? If Nothing for Nothing is true, when will we have to pay, and what, to whom?
"Fair is Fair". But if I ask you to carry my burden awhile because you are strong and I am weak, is it fair for you to ask me later to carry a similar burden, still beyond my strength, for you?
"I owe you one." But if I offered freely, how could you? What agreement was made? Did we both decide on the fairness of all the terms?
When you emotionally bleed on me, you are doing it for your gain. It is a cathartic and you do not want me to interfere with your bleeding by having my own thoughts and feelings on the subject. You use me for this, apparently because I will listen without judgment, without expressing myself, no matter how much I need too. You think this admirable of me.
With apparent justification, you are unwilling to be "used" yourself, in this or any way, by me or anyone else. Your teachings have caused you to expect an expected pay-back. Your experience has caused you to believe that the pay back will be more than is acceptable to you. It may be of a kind that you are unable to provide . . . beyond your strength.
You fear to be for me what you gladly accept from me. You justify it by saying that it is the human right to protect oneself from indignities and abuses (by abuses you apparently mean any request or demand to give of yourself, to expend effort for, or to be relied on by another in any way you did not previously agree to) and that each is responsible for himself.
If you believe that you should have a total, unconditional positive regard for an other's values, attitudes and beliefs then you must believe it is my right to expect "Quid Pro Quo".
I do not have that right.
Neither do you.
Good has nothing to do with Fair.
The Christian "turn the other cheek" does not agree with the Moslem "eye for an eye". Most Moslems try to give of themselves, to be "Christian Good" under a wide variety of circumstances. Most Christians try to protect themselves, to be "Moslem Vindictive" under a wide variety of circumstances. Both religions have built safeguard phrases into their moral codes to allow these apparently opposite behaviors. Is this why these two religions have lasted so long, with so many?
Man does not want to be alone. This is shown by his philosophies. If the human condition has already been decreed to be loneliness, we have succeeded in accomplishing the great plan. At least we have not fought too strongly to resist it.
Man does not want to be alone. This is shown by his philosophies. If the human condition is a test to see if we can achieve togetherness, we have failed to accomplish the great plan. Maybe we have not tried hard enough to succeed.