A person born and raised in abuse can choose to believe that is the way of life and living, raise a family in the same fashion, and live without a thought of despair.
Another person born and raised in abuse can choose to believe that is the opposite of how life is to be lived, raise a family in a loving and caring environment devout of abuse without a thought of despair.
In both examples we attribute the lack of despair to having made a choice they were content with.
The tribulations which no doubt aid in the formation of the self/individual are interpreted. The amount of neural pathways in said individual's brain and the capacity given that individual through genes, development, good health, and other factors which may be unknown, such as environment, etcetera, may influence greatly the growth of an idea, development of it, and outcomes of behavior when portraying that in the individual fashion. In other words, it is not as simple as saying, they were both raised in the same home. The fact of the matter that siblings, raised under the same conditions, given the same genes, come out entirely different from one another lies in more than just the connections made through synapses as bridge by bridge the information in the brain moves from place to place gathering data, looking for the rights and wrongs of said data, and ultimately attempting to decipher where to best place or archive the data for later viewing. A person may choose to ignore data in their daily routines due to circumstances, for instance, a brother may be having breakfast when a fight breaks out, the television volume may be at a moderate level, but there is nothing else going on thus the individual chooses to pay attention to:
a) breakfast
b) television
c) argument
On the other hand, the sibling we mentioned earlier was tasked moments before with moving a load of laundry from the washer to the dryer and although this individual too has audible access to the discussion taking place, there is an internal quarrel taking place where not wanting to perform this task, this moving of the cloth from point A to point B causes the individual to judge the situation very differently. Even if both siblings were sitting at the same table watching the television while parent(s) both individuals may have been thinking of completely different things at the time. One could have been wondering if the argument was their fault due to the last action -most recent activity performed- that took place, while simultaneously the other could be thinking about a school project, if other friend's family's argue as much, if all chocolate cereals taste the same, all of which will impact the traversal of the data through the brain. For one of the individuals, the data runs through the art centers of the brain, gathering information, assimilating data, comparing situations, all on its way to being archived. On the other, the individual's thought is accessing the thinking centers of the brain, very different approaches to viewing the same situation. External factors, although important, do not affect the individual as much as one gathers. The world-view of the individual is paramount in deciphering the data they view in their day-to-day environment.
The idea that ideologies are the confabulations of a person is not far-fetched. It is through thinking that all comes to fruition. It is through those processes of archival that information is painted with colors, given sound, paired with similar memories due to the existing smells, the last texture touched, or the unsavory nature of its taste. The depiction of the data once it is recalled carries all of that with it, in a sense every action taken is the tale, the story, the abstract of the person performing the action. We cannot judge a person based on these things because what we judge is ourselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment