It is impossible to efficiently judge people, for all are in a constant state of flux.
It would be of great comfort to many people, most of all myself, to be able to classify people as one does animals. That is, in Latin, on a hierarchical chart. This would make things so much more simple, without me having to change my social tactics with any of them.
I'm in a communications theory class this semester, and it is fascinating. It's interesting to think of these theorists, and the ways in which they attempt to predict human motivation. They make some very valid claims, such as the theories of Social Penetration, Uncertainty-Reduction, and especially Stella Ting-Toomey's ideas on conflict resolution in her theory of Face-Negotiation. They will continue their research, forever believing that, at some point, they will have narrowed down their theory enough to be able to fully rely on its hypothesis.
However, this will never be. People are complex; joy is as common as rage, disillusionment as hope, and obsession as passion. You will never know your best friends as well as you think, and vice-versa and, though this fact may seem incredibly depressing and increasingly frustrating, it is Good. When we think about it, would we truly want it any other way? Yes, of course, I jest that my desires lean to the ideal of having all humans placed on microscope slides for me to analyze and make clear-cut conjectures about, but after all my work would be done, what would really be gained? There would be nothing left to quest over, save God. And God created us imago dei, so who am I to tamper with that?
It would be of great comfort to many people, most of all myself, to be able to classify people as one does animals. That is, in Latin, on a hierarchical chart. This would make things so much more simple, without me having to change my social tactics with any of them.
I'm in a communications theory class this semester, and it is fascinating. It's interesting to think of these theorists, and the ways in which they attempt to predict human motivation. They make some very valid claims, such as the theories of Social Penetration, Uncertainty-Reduction, and especially Stella Ting-Toomey's ideas on conflict resolution in her theory of Face-Negotiation. They will continue their research, forever believing that, at some point, they will have narrowed down their theory enough to be able to fully rely on its hypothesis.
However, this will never be. People are complex; joy is as common as rage, disillusionment as hope, and obsession as passion. You will never know your best friends as well as you think, and vice-versa and, though this fact may seem incredibly depressing and increasingly frustrating, it is Good. When we think about it, would we truly want it any other way? Yes, of course, I jest that my desires lean to the ideal of having all humans placed on microscope slides for me to analyze and make clear-cut conjectures about, but after all my work would be done, what would really be gained? There would be nothing left to quest over, save God. And God created us imago dei, so who am I to tamper with that?
