Respecting Happiness

Following are some questions based on personal interactions observed this week:

Are you a two-seat counter person covering surrounding bar stools with personal belongings to claim your space? Do you have a consistent ownership policy in all settings? Or does it vary by venue? (i.e. lunch counter, local tavern, generic restaurant bar, $5-a-cup coffeehouse...) This week I observed a very interesting interplay of buffer zones and territoriality in a coffeehouse.

When walking in public, do you make eye contact with strangers? Or do you avoid eye contact? And does this depend on the setting? (i.e. downtown, public park, retail, grocery, fast-food joint, high-end restaurant...) This week I observed more eye contact indoors than outdoors.

If you make eye contact, and eye contact is returned, do you smile? Do you nod? Do you speak? This week I observed more smiles from women, more nods from men, more verbal acknowledgement from couples, and less acknowledgement of any kind from those in groups of three or more. There were exceptions.

When in a public stranger setting, do you intuitively feel an alliance with some and not with others? Do you initiate any contact with one group and/or shun another group? If so, which group(s) do you feel compelled to seek out and which do you avoid? This week I observed that I am inimically judgmental.

Do you choose your public stranger settings based on the likelihood of who you may encounter? This week I observed that comfort is easy.

Are these reactions and behaviors indicative of any specific characteristics? Such as friendliness vs. unfriendliness? Or security vs. insecurity? Or selfish narcissism vs. harmonious compassion? Or trust vs. wariness? Or easy vs. hard? Or are these reactions and behaviors more random based on circumstance and setting? I believe it is a fusion of situational individuality.

But I also believe that many (and probably most) of us, when we approach a stranger encounter, do so with a degree of wariness and perhaps (depending on circumstance) a certain amount of trepidation. All of the observations above are examples of strangers in passing; people we will likely never see again, or if we do it will again (likely) be a brief, passing encounter; and in these situations for most there is wariness (we are always on our guard), but likely little actual trepidation. But what about those first meetings initiated to lead to longer term relationships? How does one prepare for a stranger encounter such as attending a meeting of a social or civic organization for the first time? Or the first day of class? Or a job interview? Or a new job? We each have our methods and the point of this week's thought is not really to improve individual technique for disarming and charming, (though many of us could use that help), but rather (right now, at the beginning of this thought) I believe the point to be a better personal understanding of what I (through observations such as the passing stranger encounters) tend to perceive as a widespread lack of consideration for others. And though much of the analysis appears rhetorical (wariness + an acute sense of 'Me' + urgency mistaken as importance), by reminding myself of these human tendencies I actively hope to curb some personal frustrations caused by this epidemic of discourtesy. I need to come at this as a personal challenge to rein in my disgruntlement partially because I know I am unable to immediately raise levels of awareness, but mostly because my annoyance creates judgment which in turn perpetuates this cycle of incivility. Some may feel this is strongly stated and may disagree with the implied degree of impoliteness; those that do should get out more - alone.

With that said, I will also say that a majority of strangers encountered are not deliberately rude; merely unaware and impolite. Though there is an obviously noticeable number who cross the line from simple discourtesy to blatant and tactless disrespect. And perhaps this is made more noticeable by the factor of solitude. Is it possible that because someone is alone, an instinctive stigma is attached? This is an interesting thought that I believe may work in both directions. Perhaps people (especially those who are not alone) are more apt to disregard and/or shun the loner, and perhaps when I am alone I am more attuned (sensitive?) to perceived slights. Should I lower my standards and be more forgiving? Or should I maintain my standards and be unforgivingly judgemental? To maintain my standards will aid me in living my standards, but will also create the occasional potential for double standards. To lower my standards will create the potential for a personal dumbing-down, but will also aid me in being more agreeable and less surly. I have been told that I am surly. And as I say this I realize that many people may see surliness as discourteous. And so I find myself back in the cycle of incivility.

... ... ... ...

At this point I have just returned from last July and the post 'Free-Floating Happiness' where I again uploaded (into my thick skull) a lesson on Compassion for the Oblivious and Communal Responsibility. This refresher course reminds me that I have no choice but to find a way to come across as less surly while maintaining my high standards because I am (in some small part) responsible for other's oblivious discourtesy and that degree of responsibility is multiplied and magnified when I perpetuate the aforementioned cycle of incivility.

Yet I know that I will remain surly. If I cut that surliness though with compassionate understanding and a sense of humor to calm my inner turmoil, perhaps I can maintain and live my standards while reducing or (at least) quickening my frustration. This week's reminder has helped.

And though I feel better (in this moment), I am now disconcerted (in this moment). This week's thought feels trite; and contrived. I don't know how to argue the inarguable. I don't know how to move the seemingly immovable. I don't know how to unspin gold from yarn. I don't know how to productively substitute skepticism for another's certainty. I believe the freshest thought I have presented this week is the rhetorical analysis of human nature explaining our current cultural state of deference deprivation: wariness + an acute sense of 'Me' + urgency mistaken as importance. This formula combines the ancient instinct of diffidence and constraint for safety with the newly-hatched yearning for narcissistic complexity. This formula explains much more than disrespect and discourtesy. This formula tells a story of a lost people seeking a magical journey beyond the slag heaps of everyday existence. This formula exposes weakness and the reality of the slag heaps of everyday existence. Utilizing addition by subtraction, this formula shows the importance of respect and courtesy as a beginning.

Speaking about heresy and blasphemy, John Calvin said, "Some say that because the crime consists only of words there is no cause for such severe punishment. But we muzzle dogs; shall we leave men free to open their mouths and say what they please?" If we apply this to discourtesy and disrespect it helps me to understand that whether one is expressing their self verbally or through action and behavior, discourtesy and disrespect are not criminal and I should not in any way attempt to muzzle these expressions of individual choice. I should decide and act accordingly for myself, and when opportunity presents I should encourage a greater awareness and allow others to decide and act accordingly for their self.

Respect and courtesy is a beginning.

This entry was posted in Philosophy. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *