autotelic, autistic, assonance-hole©.

Preference and perspective and perpetual imperfections of being

I think that the only reason a human ever mocks or ridicules is to work to raise a preferred perspective to ascendancy over all others. I think that, when there is pluralism, this is not even “in the frame”; I think that debate, on any topic, does not exist to achieve equality, balance, or pluralism, it is, by its very nature, a tool of dominance and division.

For example, I respect “her” perspective and feel no need to argue what I may perceive to be its flaws. I respect “his” perspective and feel no need to debate how I perceive it only continues the fight it claims to be most interested in ending. I respect the [insert religious label here] perspective even as I perceive those who engage with it most vocally seem only to do much the same as “his” and “hers” and many others besides.

I think that the underlying, foundational pattern is the same for all instances of distinction – defining what one is “for” naturally defines as well what one is “against” and the very act of inserting any of it into the common discourse is to engender the fight for preference.

The reasons I generally do not set forth much more than my own perspective’s affect upon myself is that it is the only way to work at ensuring the above pattern is not perpetuated by me (well, as much as may be managed for a human being which, admittedly and woefully, is not as much as I wish it were).

It does not matter to me what someone thinks, what they believe, or how they choose to act in that thinking or believing. What matters to me is that these things do not intrude upon the ability of others to do the same. From where I sit, it is a very binary thing; either there is force/dominance/oppression or there is not. To me, __all acts__ that seek to place one perspective “over” another __are equal__ in that __they are__ acts of force/dominance/oppression.

Our cultures and societies seethe with this unending battle for ascendancy of perspective. In even saying this much, I make and prove myself the very hypocrite. Here lies the sad reality of humanity and I suspect it will remain until evolution severs the link between physiology and intellect and, truly, I wonder if such a thing is even possible. I am fairly convinced we would not recognize humanity without it and I suspect as well that we would not yet be at a point from which we could see such a severance as other than a horror to consider.

We are, I think, hostages to our hormones, servants to the petty preferences of psychology and physiology and perspective.